Security Requirements Analysis Report

Comprehensive Security Analysis with Interactive Dashboard

Generated: 2025-11-19 20:05:18 Report Version: 2.0 - Comprehensive Security Analysis

---

1. Executive Summary

This section provides a high-level overview of the security requirements analysis, presenting key findings, validation results, and an interactive dashboard for stakeholders and decision-makers. The executive summary enables rapid comprehension of the security posture, critical risks, control coverage, and compliance status without requiring detailed technical knowledge.

1.1. Purpose and Scope

Purpose

This document presents a comprehensive security requirements analysis for the proposed application, systematically mapping high-level business requirements to specific, actionable security controls aligned with multiple industry standards: OWASP Application Security Verification Standard (ASVS), NIST SP 800-53 Rev 5, and ISO 27001:2022. The analysis provides a complete security requirements specification that guides secure system design, implementation, and verification.

Scope

This analysis encompasses all functional requirements provided, delivering comprehensive coverage across multiple security domains:

• Requirements Analysis: Systematic decomposition and security-relevant extraction from business requirements
• Stakeholder Analysis: Identification of stakeholders, trust boundaries, and security responsibilities
• Threat Modeling: Systematic identification and assessment of security threats using STRIDE methodology
• Security Control Mapping: Mapping requirements to multi-standard security controls (OWASP ASVS, NIST SP 800-53, ISO 27001) with detailed implementation guidance
• Compliance Requirements: Identification of regulatory and legal compliance obligations
• Architectural Security: Security architecture recommendations and design patterns
• Implementation Planning: Prioritized, phased implementation roadmap
• Verification Strategies: Testing and validation approaches for security controls

The analysis provides both strategic guidance for security planning and tactical details for implementation teams.

1.2. Key Findings

This section summarizes the most critical results from the security requirements analysis, providing executives and stakeholders with immediate insight into the security posture and validation status.

Analysis Metrics

• Validation Score: 0.88/1.0
• Validation Status: ✅ Passed
• Analysis Iterations: 1
• Requirements Analyzed: 25

Application Summary

A cloud-hosted collaborative whiteboarding platform enabling distributed teams to visually brainstorm, design, and plan projects in real time across web and native clients. The platform provides multi-user boards with an infinite canvas, drawing and layout tools, templates, real-time syncing (live cursors, in-board chat, comments, audio/video integration), granular role-based access and sharing, integrations with productivity and storage services, file and version management, audit logging, notifications, and administrative analytics — all designed to scale for enterprise use with strong security, compliance, and operational controls.

The validation score reflects the quality and completeness of the security requirements across five dimensions: completeness, consistency, correctness, implementability, and alignment with business objectives. A score of 0.8 or higher indicates that the requirements are ready for implementation, while scores below this threshold may require refinement before proceeding.

1.3. Security Overview Dashboard

This interactive dashboard provides executive-level visualization of key security metrics and trends, enabling rapid assessment of the security posture through intuitive charts and data visualizations. The dashboard presents critical information across multiple dimensions: risk distribution, security control coverage, compliance status, implementation progress, and data quality metrics. For optimal viewing experience, render this document with Quarto to enable interactive chart functionality, allowing stakeholders to explore data dynamically and drill down into specific areas of interest.

Risk

Figure 1: Risk heat map showing threat distribution by likelihood and impact (1-5 scale).

Top 5 Highest Risks:

THR-004 (Critical) - Frontend Layer (web/embedded content) - Category: Information Disclosure - Likelihood: 4 | Impact: 4 - Description: Cross-site scripting (XSS) via user-supplied text boxes, sticky notes, embedded links or comments leads to session theft, credential exposure, or data exfiltration for other users viewing the board.

THR-015 (Critical) - Application Services (API layer) - Category: Denial of Service - Likelihood: 4 | Impact: 4 - Description: Abuse of API endpoints (mass board creation, large file uploads, repeated export requests) leads to resource exhaustion impacting availability.

THR-017 (High) - Frontend Layer (Embedded external content) - Category: Information Disclosure - Likelihood: 4 | Impact: 3 - Description: Embedded content (iframes, links) from external sites can leak user data or metadata (referrer, cookies) to third-party sites or enable clickjacking.

THR-026 (High) - Frontend Layer & Chat/Commenting - Category: Information Disclosure - Likelihood: 4 | Impact: 3 - Description: @mentions, threaded comments or chat may be used to spam or leak data (e.g., mention external email to exfiltrate content), or to phish other users via malicious links in chat.

THR-029 (High) - Frontend Layer & Invitation System - Category: Spoofing - Likelihood: 4 | Impact: 3 - Description: Invitation system is abused to send phishing invites or an attacker forges invitation emails to trick users into visiting malicious links or handing over credentials.

Controls

Figure 2: Security control distribution by standard (OWASP, NIST, ISO 27001).

Figure 3: OWASP ASVS control distribution by verification category (V1-V14).

Figure 4: Security control priority distribution (Critical/High/Medium/Low).

Coverage Metrics:

• Total Security Controls Mapped: 76
  • OWASP ASVS: 25 controls
  • NIST SP 800-53: 37 controls
  • ISO 27001: 14 controls
• Requirements with Security Control Mapping: 86.7% (26/30)
• Average Controls per Requirement: 2.5
• Critical Controls: 17 (22.4% of total)
• Requirements with Verification: 100.0% (30/30)
• Recommended ASVS Level: L2 (Standard)

Compliance

Figure 5: Compliance status across all applicable frameworks (Red-Amber-Green rating). Shows regulatory compliance (GDPR, HIPAA, PCI-DSS, etc.) and security standards (OWASP ASVS, NIST SP 800-53, ISO 27001).

Compliance Summary:

• ⚠️ OWASP ASVS: In Progress (Next Audit: N/A)
• ⚠️ NIST SP 800-53: In Progress (Next Audit: N/A)
• ⚠️ ISO 27001: In Progress (Next Audit: N/A)

Delivery

Figure 6: Projected implementation timeline by phase and week (based on priority-based planning).

Implementation Timeline (Projected):

• Phase 1 (Critical/High): 100% projected completion (Weeks 1-8)
• Phase 2 (Medium): 100% projected completion (Weeks 9-16)
• Phase 3 (Low/Ongoing): Continuous improvement and monitoring

Note: Timeline is based on priority-based planning and assumes steady implementation progress.

Data Quality

Validation Metrics:

Overall Validation Score: ✅ 0.88/1.0

Dimension Scores:

• ⚠️ Completeness: 0.78
• ✅ Consistency: 0.95
• ✅ Correctness: 0.90
• ✅ Implementability: 0.85
• ✅ Alignment: 0.90

Data quality and coverage metrics.

Traceability Matrix:

• Total Requirements: 30
• Linked to Threats: 30 (100.0%)
• Mapped to Security Controls: 26 (86.7%)
• With Verification: 30 (100.0%)

Data Quality: ✅ Excellent

---

2. Requirements Understanding

This section presents a comprehensive analysis of the functional requirements, extracting security-relevant information and establishing the foundation for the security requirements specification. Understanding the functional requirements is essential for identifying security implications, data sensitivity, trust boundaries, and security-critical components. This analysis transforms business requirements into security-aware specifications that inform threat modeling, control selection, and compliance assessment.

2.1. High-Level Requirements Analysis

The following high-level functional requirements have been identified and analyzed for security implications:

1. User registration and login with email/password, SSO (SAML/OIDC), OAuth (Google/Microsoft) and optional multi-factor authentication
2. Team and workspace management with role-based access controls (Owner, Admin, Member, Guest)
3. User profile management and organization-level settings
4. Invitation and onboarding flow for adding collaborators to teams and boards
5. Create, edit, duplicate, and delete boards with organization and project hierarchies
6. Board sharing controls: private, team-only, public link with permissions (view/comment/edit)
7. Board versioning, undo/redo, and change history with ability to restore prior versions
8. Board templates library for common use cases
9. Real-time collaborative editing with low-latency synchronization and conflict resolution
10. Presence indicators and live cursors for collaborators
11. In-board chat, commenting, @mentions and threaded discussions
12. Audio/video conferencing integration during sessions
13. Infinite canvas with pan/zoom and high-performance rendering
14. Drawing and layout tools: shapes, connectors, sticky notes, text boxes, grouping, alignment, smart connectors
15. Embed external content (images, documents, videos, links) and support interactive widgets (voting, timers)
16. File upload and asset management with common format support (PNG, JPG, PDF, DOCX, etc.)
17. Export boards as images or PDFs and support version control for uploaded files
18. Integrations with productivity tools (Jira, Asana, Trello), cloud storage (Google Drive, Dropbox, OneDrive), and communication platforms (Slack, Teams)
19. Public API for custom integrations and automation with secure token management
20. Fine-grained access control and ownership transfer for boards
21. Audit logging for user activity, changes, and administrative actions
22. Configurable notifications (in-app, email) and integration-driven notifications (Slack, Teams)
23. Performance and scalability goals: horizontal scaling, efficient sync, conflict resolution, and large-board performance
24. Reporting and analytics (usage, activity logs, license/admin dashboards) with export capability
25. Operational capabilities: backups, restore, monitoring, rate limiting, and DDoS mitigation

2.2. Detailed Requirements Breakdown

Req ID	Requirement	Business Category	Security Sensitivity	Data Classification
REQ-001	User registration and authentication supporting em…	Authentication	High	Confidential
REQ-002	Team and workspace creation and management, with r…	User Management	High	Confidential
REQ-003	User profiles with editable attributes and organiz…	User Management	Medium	Internal
REQ-004	Invitation system to invite users to teams and boa…	User Management	High	Confidential
REQ-005	Create, edit, duplicate, and delete boards with re…	Board Management	High	Confidential
REQ-006	Organize boards within projects and teams and prov…	Data Management	Medium	Internal
REQ-007	Manage sharing options per board: private, team-on…	Access Control	High	Confidential
REQ-008	Version history, undo/redo capabilities and abilit…	Data Management	High	Confidential
REQ-009	Board templates library for common workflows (brai…	User Experience	Low	Internal
REQ-010	Real-time collaboration with multiple users editin…	Collaboration	High	Confidential
REQ-011	Presence indicators and live cursors with configur…	Collaboration	Medium	Internal
REQ-012	In-board chat, commenting, threaded discussions, a…	Communication	Medium	Internal
REQ-013	Audio/video conferencing integration (via third-pa…	Collaboration	High	Confidential
REQ-014	Infinite canvas with smooth pan/zoom and high-perf…	User Experience	Low	Internal
REQ-015	Drawing and layout tools: shapes, lines, connector…	Whiteboard Tools	Low	Internal
REQ-016	Embedding external content (images, documents, vid…	File Management	High	Confidential
REQ-017	Interactive widgets (voting, timers) that run clie…	User Experience	Medium	Internal
REQ-018	File upload and asset management with support for …	File Management	High	Confidential
REQ-019	Export boards as raster images or PDFs with permis…	Data Management	High	Confidential
REQ-020	Integrations with productivity tools (Jira, Asana,…	Integrations	High	Confidential
REQ-021	Public API for custom integrations and automation …	Integrations	High	Confidential
REQ-022	Fine-grained board access controls: view, comment,…	Access Control	High	Confidential
REQ-023	Audit logging for authentication events, permissio…	Security/Compliance	High	Restricted
REQ-024	Configurable notifications (in-app, email) for men…	Notifications	Low	Internal
REQ-025	Performance and scalability requirements: horizont…	Performance & Scalability	Medium	Internal
REQ-026	Reporting and analytics: per-team and per-organiza…	Analytics & Administration	Medium	Internal
REQ-027	Operational controls: encrypted storage (at-rest a…	Operations & Security	High	Restricted
REQ-028	Privacy and data residency controls: per-organizat…	Security/Compliance	High	Restricted
REQ-029	Client software distribution model for web, deskto…	Client Platforms	Medium	Internal
REQ-030	Content moderation and compliance tooling: ability…	Governance	Medium	Internal

2.3. Security Context and Regulatory Obligations

Applicable regulations and compliance obligations include GDPR (EU personal data protection and data subject rights), CCPA/CPRA (California consumer privacy), SOC 2/ISO 27001 (security and operational controls for enterprise customers), and potential HIPAA obligations if platform is used to store protected health information (requires BAA and appropriate safeguards). If payments or billing data are processed directly, PCI-DSS requirements apply. Additional regional data residency laws (e.g., EU data localization, APAC variants) and workplace privacy laws may apply depending on customers. Controls should include encryption in transit and at rest, robust access controls and RBAC, retention and deletion workflows to satisfy data subject requests, comprehensive audit logging, incident response and breach notification processes, secure third-party vendor assessments for integrations and SDKs, and contractual measures (BAA, DPA) when needed.

2.4. Assumptions

• System will be cloud-hosted with multi-region deployment options for data residency.
• Clients use modern browsers (Chrome, Edge, Firefox, Safari) and supported native desktop/mobile runtimes.
• Realtime synchronization will use WebSockets/RTC or comparable protocols (and may leverage OT or CRDT algorithms).
• Third-party integration providers (Google, Microsoft, Slack, Jira, etc.) support secure OAuth flows and provide necessary APIs.
• Enterprise customers will desire SSO/SAML support and centralized admin controls.
• Customers may require compliance certifications (e.g., SOC 2) and contractual agreements (DPA, BAA) depending on industry use.
• Users have intermittent network connectivity; offline editing support may be limited or offered with constraints.
• Recording/archiving of audio/video streams will be optional and subject to separate consent and retention controls.

2.5. Constraints

• Must integrate with multiple third-party authentication providers and support enterprise SSO (SAML/OIDC), which constrains identity design.
• Real-time sync and low-latency requirements impose constraints on infrastructure (stateful servers or managed real-time services) and may limit geographic/regional architectures.
• Supporting infinite canvas and large boards increases storage and compute costs and requires sharding/tiling strategies and efficient diff/patch formats.
• Mobile and desktop native clients impose platform-specific limitations (memory, CPU, background execution) that affect feature parity and caching strategies.
• Third-party SDKs for audio/video may have licensing and regional availability constraints and bring additional security/privilege requirements.
• To satisfy data residency/regulatory requirements, need conditional data partitioning by region which complicates global features like public link sharing across regions.
• Integration with external cloud storage requires handling of external OAuth tokens, refresh tokens and secure token storage, introducing additional compliance scope.
• Retention, deletion, and right-to-be-forgotten features may conflict with audit and export requirements and require careful design of logical vs physical deletion.
• High availability, backup, and disaster recovery SLAs will increase operational cost and complexity (cross-region replication, failover strategies).
• Supporting export and preview of many file formats (DOCX, PDF) requires server-side processing which increases attack surface and must be sandboxed.

---

3. Stakeholder Analysis

This section identifies and analyzes all stakeholders involved in or affected by the system, including users, administrators, external partners, and regulatory bodies. Stakeholder analysis establishes trust boundaries, defines security responsibilities, and identifies potential security concerns from different stakeholder perspectives. Understanding stakeholder relationships and trust boundaries is critical for designing appropriate access controls, authentication mechanisms, and data protection measures.

3.1. Identified Stakeholders and User Personas

Role	Privilege Level	Trust Level	Key Security Concerns
User	User	Partially Trusted	Unauthorized access to boards, Identity theft through compromised credentials
Team Owner	Admin	Trusted	Privilege escalation risks, Mismanagement of team access and permissions
Team Admin	Admin	Trusted	Inadvertently granting excessive permissions, Data leakage through improper access
Team Member	User	Partially Trusted	Limited permissions leading to inability to collaborate effectively
Guest	Guest	Untrusted	Potential for unauthorized access to sensitive boards, Limited permissions
System Administrator	Admin	Trusted	Privilege escalation by malicious insiders, System-wide access compromise
External Integrator	Service Account	Partially Trusted	Insecure API integrations, Data exposure due to insufficient authentication measures
Real-time Sync Service	Service Account	Trusted	Service disruptions affecting collaboration, Security vulnerabilities in data sync
Notification Service	Service Account	Trusted	Spam and unauthorized notifications, Data leakage through notification content
Cloud Storage Integration	Service Account	Partially Trusted	Misconfiguration leading to data exposure, Lack of proper authentication mechanisms
API Gateway	Service Account	Trusted	Unauthorized API access leading to data compromise, Overly permissive API access

3.2. Trust Model

Trust boundaries are established at the user interface, backend server, and database levels. Security mechanisms enforcing boundaries include user authentication methods (email/password, SSO, OAuth, and MFA), role-based access control (RBAC) to ensure users can only access data and functionalities pertinent to their roles, and network segmentation to mitigate risks of unauthorized access. Users can only access their personal boards, Team Owners have comprehensive management access to team settings and permissions, while Team Admins can manage user access but with limited control over sensitive functionalities. The principle of least privilege is implemented by granting users the minimum access necessary to perform their responsibilities, thereby reducing the risk of data exposure and privilege escalation. For example, Guests have restricted access to only view boards, while Team Members can edit but not manage team settings. Automated services such as the Real-time Sync Service are designed with limited access to only the data necessary for synchronization tasks, ensuring that they do not have broader access to user data or board contents than required.

---

4. System Architecture Analysis

4.1. Architectural Overview

A cloud-hosted, multi-region collaborative whiteboarding platform composed of client frontends (web, desktop, mobile) served via CDN and an API/Realtime gateway. An Auth & API Gateway handles authentication (email/SSO/OAuth/MFA), authorization and request routing to backend application services that include Core API, Realtime Sync (CRDT/OT), Media/AV handling, Integrations, Notifications and Analytics. Persistent storage includes relational/document DBs for users and metadata, object storage for boards/assets and an append-only audit/log store; caching and pub/sub support low-latency sync and presence. External integrations (SSO providers, cloud storage, productivity and communication tools, virus scanning) are used via secure OAuth flows. The layers interact over TLS with RBAC and tenancy controls, supporting versioning, file management, exports and analytics while enabling horizontal scaling for enterprise workloads.

4.2. Architecture Diagram

4.3. Component Breakdown

Component	Responsibility	Security Criticality	External Dependencies
Frontend Layer	Deliver UI/UX for web, desktop and mobil…	Medium	CDN, Auth Gateway
Edge & Auth	Terminate TLS, serve static assets via C…	Critical	Identity Providers (Google/Microsoft/SAML IdPs), WAF/DDoS providers
Application Services	Host core business logic: Core API for b…	Critical	Cloud media/RTC SDKs, Third-party integrations (Slack/Jira)
Data Layer	Durable storage of user accounts, RBAC, …	Critical	Cloud object storage, Managed databases
External Services	Third-party identity providers, cloud st…	High	SSO/OAuth providers (Google/Microsoft/SAML IdPs), Cloud storage (GoogleDrive/Dropbox/OneDrive)

4.4. Data Flow Analysis

Users connect from web or native clients through CDN to the Auth/API Gateway which authenticates requests (email/SSO/OAuth/MFA). UI actions are sent to Core API for CRUD operations and to the Realtime Sync service for low-latency collaborative operations; realtime deltas are published via Pub/Sub/Cache and persisted to BoardStore for durability and versioning. Uploaded assets are scanned by VirusScan, stored in object storage and served via CDN. Notifications and integration events are dispatched by dedicated services. Audit logs and metrics are streamed to an append-only store and analytics pipelines. Backups and KMS-backed encryption protect persisted data; regional deployments can restrict BoardStore/Assets to required data residency zones.

4.5. Attack Surface Analysis

Primary entry points include: 1) Client UIs (web/native) exposing XSS, CSRF and supply-chain risks — mitigations: CSP, SameSite cookies, code signing and secure update channels (Risk: Medium). 2) Auth & API Gateway (login, SSO/OAuth flows, token endpoints) — high-value target for credential stuffing, token theft and SAML/OIDC misconfiguration (Risk: High). 3) Realtime endpoints (WebSocket/RTC) for low-latency sync and media — exposed to resource exhaustion, message injection and reconnection amplification (Risk: High). 4) Public REST/GraphQL APIs and Public Integrations/Webhooks — rate limit, auth scope misuse, and data exfiltration risks (Risk: High). 5) File upload and embed handling — malware, malicious file types and SSRF/XSS via embedded content (Risk: High). 6) Third-party integrations and OAuth tokens — token leakage and excessive scopes can enable lateral access (Risk: High). 7) CDN and cached assets — cache poisoning and stale content risks (Risk: Medium). 8) Admin/Analytics dashboards and export features — privileged access paths requiring strict RBAC and audit logging to prevent data exfiltration (Risk: High). Recommended mitigations: strong MFA/SSO hygiene, short-lived tokens, least-privilege OAuth scopes, content sanitization, virus scanning and sandboxed processing for files, WAF, rate limiting, monitoring/alerting, tamper-evident audit logs, region-aware data partitioning and periodic pentesting.

---

5. Threat Modeling

This section presents a comprehensive threat analysis of the system architecture and functional requirements. Threat modeling systematically identifies potential security vulnerabilities and attack vectors, enabling proactive risk mitigation through the application of appropriate security controls.

5.1. Threat Modeling Methodology

This analysis employs the STRIDE threat modeling methodology, a systematic framework developed by Microsoft for identifying security threats across six categories:

• Spoofing Identity: Threats involving impersonation of users or systems
• Tampering with Data: Threats involving unauthorized modification of data or system components
• Repudiation: Threats where users deny performing actions (lack of non-repudiation)
• Information Disclosure: Threats involving unauthorized access to sensitive information
• Denial of Service: Threats causing disruption or unavailability of system services
• Elevation of Privilege: Threats allowing unauthorized access to privileged functions

For each identified threat, the analysis evaluates likelihood (attack complexity and exposure) and impact (potential damage to confidentiality, integrity, or availability) to determine overall risk level. The methodology ensures comprehensive coverage of security concerns across all system components and interfaces.

5.2. Threat Analysis and Risk Assessment

5.2.1. Threat Overview

The following table provides a quick reference of all identified threats. Detailed analysis including descriptions, mitigation strategies, and residual risk assessment (where available) is provided in the section below.

Threat ID	Component	Category	Risk Level	Likelihood	Impact
THR-004	Frontend Layer (web/embedded content)	Information Disclosure	Critical	High	High
THR-015	Application Services (API layer)	Denial of Service	Critical	High	High
THR-001	Edge & Auth (SSO/OAuth flows, Auth tokens)	Spoofing	High	Medium	High
THR-003	Application Services (Realtime Sync / CRDT/OT)	Repudiation	High	Medium	High
THR-005	Application Services (Core API)	Tampering	High	Medium	High
THR-006	Frontend Layer & API (CSRF attack surface)	Tampering	High	Medium	High
THR-007	Data Layer (object storage for assets)	Information Disclosure	High	Medium	High
THR-008	External Services (third-party integrations)	Elevation of Privilege	High	Medium	High
THR-009	Realtime Sync / Presence / PubSub	Denial of Service	High	Medium	High
THR-010	Application Services (Media/AV processing)	Tampering	High	Low	High
THR-012	File Management (uploads)	Information Disclosure	High	Medium	High
THR-013	Access Control (RBAC, ownership transfer)	Elevation of Privilege	High	Medium	High
THR-014	Frontend Layer & API (Insecure Direct Object References)	Information Disclosure	High	Medium	High
THR-016	External Services (SSO/Identity Providers)	Information Disclosure	High	Low	High
THR-017	Frontend Layer (Embedded external content)	Information Disclosure	High	High	Medium
THR-018	Application Services (Integrations & OAuth tokens storage)	Information Disclosure	High	Medium	High
THR-019	Data Layer (relational/document DBs)	Tampering	High	Low	High
THR-021	Application Services (API layer)	Spoofing	High	Medium	High
THR-023	Data Layer (audit/log store)	Tampering	High	Low	High
THR-024	External Services (cloud storage integrations)	Information Disclosure	High	Medium	High
THR-026	Frontend Layer & Chat/Commenting	Information Disclosure	High	High	Medium
THR-028	Integrations/API (SSRF via file import or URL fetch)	Tampering	High	Medium	High
THR-029	Frontend Layer & Invitation System	Spoofing	High	High	Medium
THR-030	Supply Chain (third-party SDKs used in frontend/backends)	Elevation of Privilege	High	Medium	High
THR-002	Frontend Layer (web clients)	Tampering	Medium	Medium	Medium
THR-011	Notifications & Integrations (webhooks)	Spoofing	Medium	Medium	Medium
THR-020	Frontend Layer & API (Clickjacking / UI redress)	Tampering	Medium	Medium	Medium
THR-022	Frontend Layer (client-side plugins/widgets)	Information Disclosure	Medium	Medium	Medium
THR-025	Application Services (export/PDF/image generation)	Information Disclosure	Medium	Medium	Medium
THR-027	Performance & Scalability (CDN, Realtime gateway)	Denial of Service	Medium	Medium	Medium

Total Threats Identified: 30

5.2.2. Detailed Threat Analysis

This section provides comprehensive analysis of each identified threat, including descriptions, mitigation strategies, and residual risk assessment (where controls have been evaluated). Threats are organized by risk level for prioritized review.

Critical Risk Threats

THR-004 - Frontend Layer (web/embedded content)

• Category: Information Disclosure
• Likelihood: High | Impact: High
• Initial Risk Level: Critical
• Description: Cross-site scripting (XSS) via user-supplied text boxes, sticky notes, embedded links or comments leads to session theft, credential exposure, or data exfiltration for other users viewing the board.
• Mitigation Strategy: Strong output encoding/escaping on all rendered user content, enforce Content Security Policy (CSP), use well-sanitized rich text libraries, server-side input validation, and sanitize embedded HTML/iframes; treat embedded external content as untrusted with sandboxing.
• Controls Applied: Contextual output encoding, CSP, Rich text sanitization, Sandboxing iframes
• Control Effectiveness: High
• Residual Risk Level: High
• Status: ⚠️ Requires Review

THR-015 - Application Services (API layer)

• Category: Denial of Service
• Likelihood: High | Impact: High
• Initial Risk Level: Critical
• Description: Abuse of API endpoints (mass board creation, large file uploads, repeated export requests) leads to resource exhaustion impacting availability.
• Mitigation Strategy: Implement per-tenant and per-user rate limits, quotas for uploads and exports, circuit breakers, async processing for heavy tasks with capacity controls, and monitoring/alerting for unusual spikes.
• Controls Applied: Rate limiting & quotas, Async job queues & circuit breakers, Monitoring & alerting
• Control Effectiveness: Medium
• Residual Risk Level: High
• Status: ⚠️ Requires Review

High Risk Threats

THR-001 - Edge & Auth (SSO/OAuth flows, Auth tokens)

• Category: Spoofing
• Likelihood: Medium | Impact: High
• Initial Risk Level: High
• Description: An attacker forges or replays authentication tokens (JWT/OAuth tokens) or exploits weak SSO/OAuth configuration to impersonate a legitimate user and gain access to boards and organization resources.
• Mitigation Strategy: Enforce strong token validation (signature, issuer, audience), short token TTLs, token revocation/rotation, PKCE for OAuth flows, require MFA for high-privilege roles, monitor for anomalous token usage and reuse, enforce SAML/OIDC best practices including audience and recipient checks.
• Controls Applied: MFA, OAuth PKCE/SAML best practices, JWT signature & claim validation, Token revocation/rotation, Anomaly detection/logging
• Control Effectiveness: Medium
• Residual Risk Level: Medium
• Status: ⚠️ Requires Review

THR-003 - Application Services (Realtime Sync / CRDT/OT)

• Category: Repudiation
• Likelihood: Medium | Impact: High
• Initial Risk Level: High
• Description: Users or attackers perform malicious edits (delete or alter board history) and later deny actions; without proper immutable logging, attribution is lost and actions cannot be proven.
• Mitigation Strategy: Write all operations to append-only audit/log store with tamper-evident techniques, include user ids and timestamps, maintain versioned board history, enable cryptographic signing of audit entries, and preserve backups for legal/forensics.
• Controls Applied: Append-only audit logs, Cryptographic signing of logs, Versioned board history & backups
• Control Effectiveness: High
• Residual Risk Level: Medium
• Status: ⚠️ Requires Review

THR-005 - Application Services (Core API)

• Category: Tampering
• Likelihood: Medium | Impact: High
• Initial Risk Level: High
• Description: API endpoints vulnerable to injection (SQL/NoSQL/command injection) allow attackers to modify database records, board content, or permissions.
• Mitigation Strategy: Use parameterized queries/ORMs, input validation and whitelisting, least-privilege DB accounts, prepared statements, WAF rules for injection patterns, regular code review and dependency scanning.
• Controls Applied: Parameterized queries/ORM, Input validation/whitelisting, WAF
• Control Effectiveness: Medium
• Residual Risk Level: Medium
• Status: ⚠️ Requires Review

THR-006 - Frontend Layer & API (CSRF attack surface)

• Category: Tampering
• Likelihood: Medium | Impact: High
• Initial Risk Level: High
• Description: Cross-Site Request Forgery causes authenticated users’ browsers to execute state-changing API calls (e.g., change sharing settings, invite users, transfer ownership) without their intent.
• Mitigation Strategy: Use anti-CSRF tokens for state-changing APIs or require same-site cookies and ensure APIs require Authorization headers (not relying solely on cookies), enforce double-submit, validate Origin/Referrer headers for sensitive operations.
• Controls Applied: CSRF tokens/SameSite cookies, Require auth headers, Origin/Referrer validation
• Control Effectiveness: High
• Residual Risk Level: Medium
• Status: ⚠️ Requires Review

THR-007 - Data Layer (object storage for assets)

• Category: Information Disclosure
• Likelihood: Medium | Impact: High
• Initial Risk Level: High
• Description: Misconfigured object storage (public buckets, insecure signed URL expiry) exposes uploaded assets or board exports to unauthorized users or search engines.
• Mitigation Strategy: Enforce private-by-default storage policies, use short-lived signed URLs, bucket policies with least privilege, audit storage ACLs regularly, and implement malware scanning on upload.
• Controls Applied: Private-by-default storage, Short-lived signed URLs, Bucket IAM policies, Malware scanning on upload
• Control Effectiveness: Medium
• Residual Risk Level: Medium
• Status: ⚠️ Requires Review

THR-008 - External Services (third-party integrations)

• Category: Elevation of Privilege
• Likelihood: Medium | Impact: High
• Initial Risk Level: High
• Description: Compromised third-party integration (e.g., Jira, Google Drive) or leaked integration tokens allow an attacker to access, modify, or exfiltrate organization data via integrations.
• Mitigation Strategy: Use least-privilege scopes for OAuth tokens, store integration credentials encrypted in KMS, provide tenant-scoped tokens, implement token rotation and revocation, allow admins to audit and revoke integrations, and implement backpressure for unusual integration activity.
• Controls Applied: Encrypted token storage (KMS), Least-privilege OAuth scopes, Token rotation and revocation, Admin audit & revoke
• Control Effectiveness: Medium
• Residual Risk Level: Medium
• Status: ⚠️ Requires Review

THR-009 - Realtime Sync / Presence / PubSub

• Category: Denial of Service
• Likelihood: Medium | Impact: High
• Initial Risk Level: High
• Description: An attacker floods the realtime sync channels with bogus operations or presence signals, causing high CPU/network usage, increased latencies or resource exhaustion affecting collaboration for many users.
• Mitigation Strategy: Apply rate limiting per connection/user, quota operations, validate operation sizes and shapes server-side, implement backpressure and sharding, use WAF/DDoS protection at edge, and monitor anomalous realtime traffic patterns.
• Controls Applied: Rate limiting/quota, WAF & DDoS protection, Operation size validation
• Control Effectiveness: Medium
• Residual Risk Level: Medium
• Status: ⚠️ Requires Review

THR-010 - Application Services (Media/AV processing)

• Category: Tampering
• Likelihood: Low | Impact: High
• Initial Risk Level: High
• Description: Malicious media (audio/video) or crafted files cause remote code execution or memory corruption in media processing pipelines or third-party SDKs used for conferencing.
• Mitigation Strategy: Run media processing in isolated sandboxes/containers with strict resource limits, keep codecs and SDKs updated, perform input validation, use third-party CVE monitoring, and scan files for known exploit patterns before processing.
• Controls Applied: Sandboxed media processing, Regular patching/CVE monitoring, Malware scanning
• Control Effectiveness: Medium
• Residual Risk Level: Medium
• Status: ⚠️ Requires Review

THR-012 - File Management (uploads)

• Category: Information Disclosure
• Likelihood: Medium | Impact: High
• Initial Risk Level: High
• Description: Uploaded files contain sensitive data (PII, secrets) that are stored without encryption or leaked via export features, public links, or backups.
• Mitigation Strategy: Encrypt files at rest using KMS, enforce DLP/malware scanning on upload, prevent exporting of sensitive file types without admin consent, audit exports, and support tenant-level data residency controls.
• Controls Applied: KMS encryption at rest, Malware/DLP scanning, Export auditing & admin controls
• Control Effectiveness: Medium
• Residual Risk Level: Medium
• Status: ⚠️ Requires Review

THR-013 - Access Control (RBAC, ownership transfer)

• Category: Elevation of Privilege
• Likelihood: Medium | Impact: High
• Initial Risk Level: High
• Description: Broken access control or logic flaws allow users to escalate privileges (e.g., Member -> Admin, transfer ownership, access private boards of other teams).
• Mitigation Strategy: Enforce server-side authorization checks on every operation (deny-by-default), implement fine-grained RBAC with ABAC where needed, adopt least privilege for roles, require multi-step verification for ownership transfers, and perform authorization testing (fuzzing & automated checks).
• Controls Applied: Server-side RBAC enforcement, Least privilege model, Multi-step confirmation for ownership changes
• Control Effectiveness: Medium
• Residual Risk Level: Medium
• Status: ⚠️ Requires Review

THR-014 - Frontend Layer & API (Insecure Direct Object References)

• Category: Information Disclosure
• Likelihood: Medium | Impact: High
• Initial Risk Level: High
• Description: Predictable or sequential identifiers for boards/assets allow attackers to enumerate and access resources (insecure direct object references) via unauthenticated or insufficiently authorized requests.
• Mitigation Strategy: Use non-guessable IDs (UUIDs, random tokens), enforce per-request authorization checks, signed URLs for assets, and audit access patterns to detect enumeration attempts.
• Controls Applied: Unpredictable object identifiers, Per-request auth checks, Signed asset URLs
• Control Effectiveness: Medium
• Residual Risk Level: Medium
• Status: ⚠️ Requires Review

THR-016 - External Services (SSO/Identity Providers)

• Category: Information Disclosure
• Likelihood: Low | Impact: High
• Initial Risk Level: High
• Description: Compromise or misconfiguration of an external IdP (or compromised enterprise IdP account) leads to disclosure or unauthorized access across multiple tenants via SSO.
• Mitigation Strategy: Support federation guards (restrict IdPs per tenant), require proof of domain ownership for enterprise SSO, enable SCIM provisioning auditing, and provide admin controls to unlink compromised IdPs and force re-authentication.
• Controls Applied: Tenant-specific IdP restrictions, SCIM audit trails, Forced re-authentication & session revocation
• Control Effectiveness: Medium
• Residual Risk Level: Medium
• Status: ⚠️ Requires Review

THR-017 - Frontend Layer (Embedded external content)

• Category: Information Disclosure
• Likelihood: High | Impact: Medium
• Initial Risk Level: High
• Description: Embedded content (iframes, links) from external sites can leak user data or metadata (referrer, cookies) to third-party sites or enable clickjacking.
• Mitigation Strategy: Sandbox embedded iframes, strip/refine referrer headers, use rel=‘noopener’ for links, require user confirmation before embedding external content, and render previews server-side to neutralize active content.
• Controls Applied: Iframe sandboxing, Referrer policy, Server-side content preview/sanitization
• Control Effectiveness: High
• Residual Risk Level: Medium
• Status: ⚠️ Requires Review

THR-018 - Application Services (Integrations & OAuth tokens storage)

• Category: Information Disclosure
• Likelihood: Medium | Impact: High
• Initial Risk Level: High
• Description: Stored integration tokens (Jira/Slack/Drive) are exfiltrated from databases or logs, allowing attackers to access external services and data.
• Mitigation Strategy: Encrypt integration tokens with KMS, avoid logging secrets, rotate tokens periodically, implement strict DB access controls and monitoring, and provide least-privilege scopes for integrations.
• Controls Applied: KMS-encrypted credential store, No-secret logging policies, Token rotation & scope limitations
• Control Effectiveness: Medium
• Residual Risk Level: Medium
• Status: ⚠️ Requires Review

THR-019 - Data Layer (relational/document DBs)

• Category: Tampering
• Likelihood: Low | Impact: High
• Initial Risk Level: High
• Description: An attacker or compromised process modifies board version history, RBAC metadata, or audit logs in the primary databases to cover tracks or change permissions.
• Mitigation Strategy: Use database-level auditing, append-only audit store for critical events, restrict DB admin operations to a few privileged roles, use immutable backups and multi-region replication, and monitor for unauthorized schema/data changes.
• Controls Applied: DB auditing, Append-only audit store, Immutable backups & replication
• Control Effectiveness: High
• Residual Risk Level: Medium
• Status: ⚠️ Requires Review

THR-021 - Application Services (API layer)

• Category: Spoofing
• Likelihood: Medium | Impact: High
• Initial Risk Level: High
• Description: API clients use stolen API keys or reused tokens to impersonate service clients (server-to-server integrations) and perform unauthorized API calls.
• Mitigation Strategy: Issue scoped API keys with least privilege and rotation, require mutual TLS for server-to-server integrations, implement granular permissions and allow admins to revoke keys, implement usage monitoring and anomaly detection.
• Controls Applied: Scoped API keys & rotation, Mutual TLS for critical integrations, Anomaly detection
• Control Effectiveness: Medium
• Residual Risk Level: Medium
• Status: ⚠️ Requires Review

THR-023 - Data Layer (audit/log store)

• Category: Tampering
• Likelihood: Low | Impact: High
• Initial Risk Level: High
• Description: Admin or attacker with elevated privileges alters or deletes audit logs to erase evidence of malicious activity.
• Mitigation Strategy: Use append-only tamper-evident log stores, replicate logs to separate write-only storage/region, use cryptographic signing, and restrict access to logs to a limited set of roles with out-of-band alerting on log modifications.
• Controls Applied: Append-only/tamper-evident logs, Replication to separate write-only storage, Cryptographic signing
• Control Effectiveness: High
• Residual Risk Level: Medium
• Status: ⚠️ Requires Review

THR-024 - External Services (cloud storage integrations)

• Category: Information Disclosure
• Likelihood: Medium | Impact: High
• Initial Risk Level: High
• Description: Integration with third-party cloud storage results in unintentional sharing of organization documents (e.g., Drive link made public), leaking sensitive business information.
• Mitigation Strategy: Request minimal scopes, allow admins to restrict which cloud providers or scopes are allowed, surface link-sharing risks to users, and scan metadata for public/shared flags and alert admins.
• Controls Applied: Scope minimization, Admin controls for integrations, Share-state scanning & alerts
• Control Effectiveness: Medium
• Residual Risk Level: Medium
• Status: ⚠️ Requires Review

THR-026 - Frontend Layer & Chat/Commenting

• Category: Information Disclosure
• Likelihood: High | Impact: Medium
• Initial Risk Level: High
• Description: @mentions, threaded comments or chat may be used to spam or leak data (e.g., mention external email to exfiltrate content), or to phish other users via malicious links in chat.
• Mitigation Strategy: Rate limit mentions/messages, sanitize and rewrite links (e.g., safe redirector), warn/scan for suspicious links, allow users to block/unsubscribe, and provide link previews that verify destination safety.
• Controls Applied: Link scanning/safe redirector, Rate limiting on messaging, Message sanitization
• Control Effectiveness: Medium
• Residual Risk Level: Medium
• Status: ⚠️ Requires Review

THR-028 - Integrations/API (SSRF via file import or URL fetch)

• Category: Tampering
• Likelihood: Medium | Impact: High
• Initial Risk Level: High
• Description: Attackers supply URLs or files causing the backend to fetch internal metadata or access internal resources (SSRF), enabling discovery of internal services or exfiltration.
• Mitigation Strategy: Validate and restrict outbound fetch domains, use allowlists, perform server-side URL parsing and block private IP ranges, fetch via isolated proxies with egress controls, and scan file contents rather than fetching remote content when possible.
• Controls Applied: Outbound fetch allowlist/proxy, Private IP blocking, Isolated fetch workers
• Control Effectiveness: High
• Residual Risk Level: Medium
• Status: ⚠️ Requires Review

THR-029 - Frontend Layer & Invitation System

• Category: Spoofing
• Likelihood: High | Impact: Medium
• Initial Risk Level: High
• Description: Invitation system is abused to send phishing invites or an attacker forges invitation emails to trick users into visiting malicious links or handing over credentials.
• Mitigation Strategy: Sign outbound emails with DMARC/DKIM/SPF, include clear app branding and context-aware invite pages, require recipients to authenticate via provider (SSO) and show inviter identity, and rate limit invite sending; provide admin-level controls for external invites.
• Controls Applied: DMARC/DKIM/SPF, Invite rate limiting, Branding & context on invite pages
• Control Effectiveness: Medium
• Residual Risk Level: Medium
• Status: ⚠️ Requires Review

THR-030 - Supply Chain (third-party SDKs used in frontend/backends)

• Category: Elevation of Privilege
• Likelihood: Medium | Impact: High
• Initial Risk Level: High
• Description: Compromised or malicious third-party libraries (npm packages, SDKs) introduce backdoors or escalations allowing attackers to run arbitrary code or access secrets.
• Mitigation Strategy: Pin dependency versions, use SCA tooling (software composition analysis), prefer vetted/enterprise packages, apply runtime restrictions (CSP, subresource integrity for web), scan for malicious packages, and perform periodic dependency audits.
• Controls Applied: Dependency pinning & SCA, Subresource Integrity (SRI), Runtime restrictions (CSP)
• Control Effectiveness: Medium
• Residual Risk Level: Medium
• Status: ⚠️ Requires Review

Medium Risk Threats

THR-002 - Frontend Layer (web clients)

• Category: Tampering
• Likelihood: Medium | Impact: Medium
• Initial Risk Level: Medium
• Description: Client-side JavaScript or local cached board deltas are tampered with (local modification of deltas or replay) to inject malicious deltas or corrupt board content that then syncs to other users.
• Mitigation Strategy: Sign/validate deltas on the server side (operation-level HMAC or signatures), implement server-side authoritative validation of operations, limit client trust, use secure local storage mechanisms, and include operation sequencing / nonce checks.
• Controls Applied: Server-side operation validation, HMAC-signed deltas, Local storage protections (encryption & integrity checks)
• Control Effectiveness: Medium
• Residual Risk Level: Low
• Status: ⚠️ Requires Review

THR-011 - Notifications & Integrations (webhooks)

• Category: Spoofing
• Likelihood: Medium | Impact: Medium
• Initial Risk Level: Medium
• Description: An attacker spoofs webhook events or forges callbacks (from Slack/Jira/etc.) to trigger unauthorized actions or inject content into boards and activity streams.
• Mitigation Strategy: Validate webhook signatures (HMAC), use mutual TLS where possible, verify sender IP ranges or tokens, and implement replay protection and strict parsing of incoming webhook payloads.
• Controls Applied: Webhook signature validation, Replay protection, Mutual TLS for critical integrations
• Control Effectiveness: High
• Residual Risk Level: Low
• Status: ⚠️ Requires Review

THR-020 - Frontend Layer & API (Clickjacking / UI redress)

• Category: Tampering
• Likelihood: Medium | Impact: Medium
• Initial Risk Level: Medium
• Description: An attacker frames the application or uses hidden UI overlays to trick users into performing sensitive actions (e.g., changing access, exporting data).
• Mitigation Strategy: Use X-Frame-Options or CSP frame-ancestors headers, require re-authentication (or confirm dialogues) for sensitive operations, and implement UI anti-automation checks for critical flows.
• Controls Applied: X-Frame-Options/CSP frame-ancestors, Re-auth for critical ops
• Control Effectiveness: High
• Residual Risk Level: Low
• Status: ⚠️ Requires Review

THR-022 - Frontend Layer (client-side plugins/widgets)

• Category: Information Disclosure
• Likelihood: Medium | Impact: Medium
• Initial Risk Level: Medium
• Description: Client-side telemetry or local caches accidentally include sensitive board content or PII and are leaked via browser-sync or telemetry endpoints.
• Mitigation Strategy: Minimize telemetry collection (opt-in), anonymize/aggregate telemetry, encrypt local caches and scope cached content, and provide clear retention policies and controls for local data.
• Controls Applied: Telemetry opt-in & anonymization, Encrypted local cache
• Control Effectiveness: Medium
• Residual Risk Level: Low
• Status: ⚠️ Requires Review

THR-025 - Application Services (export/PDF/image generation)

• Category: Information Disclosure
• Likelihood: Medium | Impact: Medium
• Initial Risk Level: Medium
• Description: Board exports (PDF/PNG) are generated with embedded metadata (emails, internal URLs) that leak internal information when shared externally.
• Mitigation Strategy: Scrub sensitive metadata from exports, allow admins to disable exports, present clear warnings when sharing exports publicly, and maintain audit logs of exports per user/board.
• Controls Applied: Metadata scrubbing, Export auditing & admin controls
• Control Effectiveness: Medium
• Residual Risk Level: Low
• Status: ⚠️ Requires Review

THR-027 - Performance & Scalability (CDN, Realtime gateway)

• Category: Denial of Service
• Likelihood: Medium | Impact: Medium
• Initial Risk Level: Medium
• Description: Large boards with many objects or many simultaneous collaborators lead to performance degradation; an attacker may intentionally craft large documents to cause high memory/cpu on rendering and sync.
• Mitigation Strategy: Enforce size limits per board/object, paginate or chunk operations, lazy-load canvas regions, use CDN caching for static assets, and autoscale realtime services with admission control for overloaded tenants.
• Controls Applied: Size/complexity quotas, Lazy-loading & chunking, Autoscaling & admission control
• Control Effectiveness: Medium
• Residual Risk Level: Low
• Status: ⚠️ Requires Review

Risk Reduction Summary:

• Critical Risk Reduction: 2 threats reduced from Critical to lower levels
• High Risk Reduction: 22 threats reduced from High to lower levels
• Residual Risk Distribution: 2 threats remain at Critical/High level

5.3. Risk Summary

The most critical threats center on authentication/authorization failures, client-side code and content handling (XSS, injection, insecure embedding), and availability/abuse of realtime and API services. High-risk scenarios include token/SSO compromise (THR-001, THR-016), critical injection/tampering of backend APIs and media processing (THR-005, THR-010), and large-scale DoS or abuse of realtime channels and API endpoints (THR-009, THR-015). Key attack vectors are: SSO/OAuth token misuse, XSS via board content and embedded items, insecure direct object references and misconfigured object storage, malicious third-party integrations and compromised tokens, SSRF via URL imports, and supply-chain compromises in third-party libraries. The system appears to have important security controls available (TLS termination, WAF/DDoS providers, RBAC, KMS, append-only logs, and malware scanning) but many threats still require prioritized attention: 1) Harden authentication and session/token lifecycle (MFA, PKCE, short TTLs, token revocation), 2) Eliminate client-sourced trust (server-side validation and signed operations), 3) Prevent content-based XSS and unsafe embedding (CSP, sanitization, sandboxing), 4) Enforce strict access controls and object storage policies (non-guessable IDs, signed URLs, encryption), and 5) Implement robust rate limiting/quota and monitoring for realtime and API layers. Immediate remediation should focus on XSS/content sanitization, authorization checks for all APIs, secure storage/rotation of integration tokens, strong telemetry/logging/audit trails, and DDoS/rate-limit protections. Overall posture is moderate-to-high risk until these priority controls are fully implemented and verified through testing (authz fuzzing, pentests, SCA, dependency audits, and resiliency testing).

---

6. Multi-Standard Security Requirements Mapping

This section maps each functional requirement to specific security controls from multiple industry standards: OWASP Application Security Verification Standard (ASVS), NIST SP 800-53 Rev 5, and ISO 27001:2022. This multi-standard approach provides comprehensive coverage across application-level, enterprise-level, and organizational-level security domains:

• OWASP ASVS: Application-level security controls (code, APIs, authentication, session management)
• NIST SP 800-53: Enterprise security controls (governance, risk management, incident response)
• ISO 27001: Information security management controls (policies, procedures, organizational controls)

Requirements are prioritized based on risk assessment and compliance needs, with controls selected from the most appropriate standard(s) for each requirement type.

6.1. Recommended ASVS Compliance Level

Recommended Level: L2

Level 2: Standard

Recommended for most production applications. Provides comprehensive security coverage suitable for applications handling sensitive data or operating in regulated environments. Includes controls for authentication, authorization, data protection, and secure communications.

The recommendation considers factors such as:

• Data sensitivity and classification levels
• Regulatory and compliance requirements (GDPR, HIPAA, PCI-DSS, etc.)
• Threat landscape and risk assessment from threat modeling
• Business criticality and potential impact of security incidents

All security controls referenced in this document align with this recommended compliance level.

6.2. Requirements Mapping

This section maps each high-level requirement to specific security controls from multiple standards (OWASP ASVS, NIST SP 800-53, ISO 27001) with detailed descriptions, relevance explanations, and integration guidance. Controls are grouped by standard for clarity.

6.2.1. REQ-001: User registration and login with email/password, SSO (SAML/OIDC), OAuth (Google/Microsoft) and optional multi-factor authentication

OWASP ASVS Controls

V2.1

Requirement: Verify that authentication controls (including password, SSO, and multi-factor authentication) are implemented securely. Ensure secure password storage, account lockout, session management, and support for federated identity protocols like SAML and OIDC.

Relevance: Directly addresses secure authentication, SSO, OAuth and MFA required by the high-level requirement. Ensures secure storage, session handling and federated identity support.

Integration Tips: Use proven authentication libraries, enforce secure password hashing (e.g., bcrypt/Argon2), implement SAML/OIDC flows via vetted IdP libraries, and enable MFA as an option during login and for high-risk actions.

Verification Method: Review implementation against OWASP checklist, inspect password storage, test SSO flows (SAML/OIDC), and verify MFA enrolment and challenge behaviour in functional tests.

Level: L2 | Priority: Critical

NIST SP 800-53 Controls

IA-2

Requirement: Devices and users shall be uniquely identified and authenticated. Supports multi-factor authentication and federated authentication mechanisms per organizational policy.

Relevance: Specifies unique identification and support for MFA and federated authentication—aligns with requirement to support OAuth and SSO providers.

Integration Tips: Implement identity lifecycle per NIST guidance, require unique identifiers, integrate IdPs using secure OAuth/OIDC/SAML client libraries, and enable configurable MFA enforcement per policy.

Verification Method: Review identity management design, test MFA enforcement, and audit federated authentication configurations and logs.

Priority: Critical

ISO 27001:2022 Controls

A.9.4.2

Requirement: Use of privileged and non-privileged authentication methods including secure implementation of authentication mechanisms and supporting technologies (e.g., SSO).

Relevance: Reinforces organizational control over authentication methods and SSO usage; useful for policy and compliance mapping.

Integration Tips: Document authentication policies, include SSO and MFA in access control policies, and ensure contractual controls for external IdPs.

Verification Method: Policy review, configuration inspection, and evidence of enforced authentication methods across systems.

Priority: High

6.2.2. REQ-002: Team and workspace management with role-based access controls (Owner, Admin, Member, Guest)

OWASP ASVS Controls

V4.1

Requirement: Verify that role-based access control is implemented correctly. Ensure separation of duties, least privilege, and that role assignment and revocation are enforced server-side.

Relevance: Directly targets RBAC functionality (roles, separation of duties) required for team/workspace roles.

Integration Tips: Implement server-side RBAC checks for all actions, maintain role assignment workflows, and enforce least privilege for Owner/Admin/Member/Guest roles.

Verification Method: Role matrix review, unit/integration tests for authorization checks, and penetration tests to attempt privilege escalation.

Level: L2 | Priority: Critical

NIST SP 800-53 Controls

AC-2

Requirement: Account management: The organization manages information system accounts, including account types, roles, and privileges, and manages assignment and removal of access.

Relevance: Addresses lifecycle management of accounts and roles, covering team member onboarding/offboarding and role changes.

Integration Tips: Automate role assignment and revocation processes, integrate with provisioning workflows, and log role changes for audit.

Verification Method: Review account management procedures, test provisioning/deprovisioning, and inspect audit logs for role change events.

Priority: High

AC-6

Requirement: Least privilege: The organization limits users’ access to the minimum necessary to perform their duties.

Relevance: Enforces principle of least privilege for role definitions (Owner, Admin, Member, Guest).

Integration Tips: Define minimal permission sets per role, perform regular review of role capabilities, and use separation of duties controls where needed.

Verification Method: Permission audits, role-based access tests, and reviews of unneeded privileges.

Priority: High

6.2.3. REQ-003: User profile management and organization-level settings

OWASP ASVS Controls

V2.8

Requirement: Verify secure handling of user profile and account settings. Ensure personal data is protected, edits are authorized, and privacy settings are enforced.

Relevance: Covers secure modification and protection of profile data and enforcement of privacy settings at user and org level.

Integration Tips: Protect profile endpoints with authorization checks, validate profile input, and provide privacy toggles respecting least exposure of PII.

Verification Method: Functional tests for profile update endpoints, data-protection reviews, and privacy settings verification.

Level: L1 | Priority: High

NIST SP 800-53 Controls

AC-2 (3)

Requirement: The organization supports management of account attributes, including user profile information, and enforces authorized changes.

Relevance: Mandates controlled modification of account attributes consistent with organization-level settings.

Integration Tips: Enforce attribute change authorization, log profile changes, and include org-level policy enforcement in account services.

Verification Method: Audit change logs, test that unauthorized profile edits are blocked, and policy conformance checks.

Priority: High

ISO 27001:2022 Controls

A.9.2.3

Requirement: Management of privileged access rights and user profiles to ensure that changes to profiles are controlled and reviewed.

Relevance: Supports formal control and review of profile and organization-level changes for compliance.

Integration Tips: Define change approval processes for org settings, periodically review privileged profile changes, and keep records for audits.

Verification Method: Policy and procedural review, evidence of change reviews, and sample audits of profile modifications.

Priority: Medium

6.2.4. REQ-004: Invitation and onboarding flow for adding collaborators to teams and boards

OWASP ASVS Controls

V2.6

Requirement: Verify account provisioning and deprovisioning workflows, including secure invitation flows, email verification, and protections against token replay and forging.

Relevance: Directly matches secure invite flows, token handling, and protections needed during onboarding.

Integration Tips: Use single-use, time-limited invite tokens, tie invites to identity verification, and ensure replay protection and revocation for invites.

Verification Method: Test invite token lifecycle, inspect invite link generation and expiry, and attempt token replay attacks in QA.

Level: L2 | Priority: High

NIST SP 800-53 Controls

AC-2 (6)

Requirement: The organization controls the automated establishment, activation, modification, disabling, and removal of accounts, including invited users and external collaborators.

Relevance: Requires controlled automation for onboarding and offboarding which applies to collaborator invites.

Integration Tips: Implement automated provisioning tied to invite acceptance, ensure automated disabling on offboarding, and log lifecycle events.

Verification Method: Review provisioning logs, test automated disablement, and validate workflow completeness.

Priority: High

ISO 27001:2022 Controls

A.7.1.2

Requirement: Roles and responsibilities for user provisioning and deprovisioning including onboarding and offboarding procedures.

Relevance: Ensures the organization has defined roles and procedures for onboarding which affects invitations and collaborator management.

Integration Tips: Document responsibilities, include security checks in onboarding SOPs, and ensure coordination with access control systems.

Verification Method: Process documentation review and sample onboarding/offboarding records.

Priority: Medium

6.2.5. REQ-005: Create, edit, duplicate, and delete boards with organization and project hierarchies

OWASP ASVS Controls

V4.3

Requirement: Verify that object level access controls are enforced for create, read, update, delete operations. Ensure proper authorization checks on hierarchical resources and multi-tenant isolation.

Relevance: Applies to CRUD operations for boards and ensuring hierarchical access (org/project/board) is respected.

Integration Tips: Enforce server-side ACL checks per board and hierarchy, prevent horizontal privilege escalation, and scope actions to tenant boundaries.

Verification Method: Authorization unit tests, access control matrix validation, and privilege escalation pentesting.

Level: L2 | Priority: Critical

NIST SP 800-53 Controls

AC-3

Requirement: Access enforcement: The information system enforces assigned authorizations for controlling access to resources including hierarchical access.

Relevance: Mandates enforcement of assigned authorizations across hierarchical structures like organizations/projects.

Integration Tips: Map RBAC roles into access enforcement points, centralize authorization logic, and include ownership checks for delete/duplicate operations.

Verification Method: Policy-to-enforcement mapping review and tests to confirm unauthorized actions are blocked.

Priority: High

ISO 27001:2022 Controls

A.8.1.3

Requirement: Assets (including data and resources) shall be managed throughout their lifecycle with ownership and classification defined.

Relevance: Addresses lifecycle and ownership of boards as assets within organization/project hierarchies.

Integration Tips: Define board ownership metadata, classification levels, and lifecycle policies for create/duplicate/delete operations.

Verification Method: Asset inventory review and lifecycle policy conformance checks.

Priority: Medium

6.2.6. REQ-006: Board sharing controls: private, team-only, public link with permissions (view/comment/edit)

OWASP ASVS Controls

V4.5

Requirement: Verify access control models for sharing resources, including link-based sharing and anonymized access. Ensure permission scopes (read/comment/edit) are enforced and link tokens are unguessable and revocable.

Relevance: Directly maps to sharing modes (private/team/public link) and permission scopes enforcement.

Integration Tips: Implement scoped, time-limited share tokens, validate permissions server-side for each action, and provide revocation/rotation for shared links.

Verification Method: Token entropy testing, permission matrix tests, and revoke-and-test flows for links.

Level: L2 | Priority: Critical

NIST SP 800-53 Controls

AC-19

Requirement: Access control for mobile devices and collaboration tools including capabilities for remote access, sharing, and revocation of shared access.

Relevance: Ensures sharing features have revocation and remote access controls to prevent unauthorized access via links.

Integration Tips: Provide administrative controls for revoking shared access, maintain share audit logs, and apply cryptographic protections to link URLs.

Verification Method: Functional testing of sharing revocation, audit log checks, and URL/token strength review.

Priority: High

SC-12

Requirement: Cryptographic protection of data during sharing and transmission to prevent unauthorized disclosure via shared links.

Relevance: Requires encryption of shared content and transport for public links.

Integration Tips: Use TLS for all transport, encrypt sensitive payloads when stored or delivered, and consider signed URLs with expiry.

Verification Method: Cryptography configuration review and TLS/URL signing tests.

Priority: High

6.2.7. REQ-007: Board versioning, undo/redo, and change history with ability to restore prior versions

OWASP ASVS Controls

V10.1

Requirement: Verify that data versioning and history functions maintain integrity and are protected against unauthorized tampering. Ensure the ability to restore prior versions with appropriate access controls.

Relevance: Directly addresses versioning, history, and restoration with integrity and authorization requirements.

Integration Tips: Store version metadata immutably or with tamper-evident mechanisms, restrict restore operations to authorized roles, and protect version stores from unauthorized changes.

Verification Method: Integrity checks of version store, restore operation tests, and tamper attempts in controlled tests.

Level: L2 | Priority: Critical

NIST SP 800-53 Controls

SI-12

Requirement: Information system monitoring for integrity and unauthorized modification; maintain versioning and mechanisms for rollback and recovery.

Relevance: Supports monitoring for unauthorized changes and rollback capabilities which are core to version history.

Integration Tips: Implement integrity monitoring and alerting for version stores, and maintain documented rollback procedures tested regularly.

Verification Method: Integrity monitoring logs review and rollback exercise results.

Priority: High

CP-9

Requirement: Information system backup: Ensure backup and restoration processes that preserve version history and integrity.

Relevance: Backups and restores must preserve versioning to enable reliable restores of prior board states.

Integration Tips: Include versioned data in backups, verify backup integrity, and test restoration to known good states.

Verification Method: Backup logs, restoration tests, and integrity verification of restored versions.

Priority: High

6.2.8. REQ-008: Board templates library for common use cases

OWASP ASVS Controls

V8.2

Requirement: Verify secure handling of templates and reusable assets. Ensure templates don’t embed sensitive default secrets and respect access controls.

Relevance: Ensures templates are sanitized and don’t contain secrets or insecure defaults when used by multiple users/orgs.

Integration Tips: Scan templates for embedded secrets, apply access controls on template usage and editing, and provide safe defaults.

Verification Method: Template content scans, secrets detection tests, and permission checks on template library.

Level: L1 | Priority: Medium

NIST SP 800-53 Controls

CM-2

Requirement: Baseline configurations and managed configuration change for templates or reusable system components.

Relevance: Treats templates as configuration artifacts needing change control and baselining.

Integration Tips: Apply configuration management for templates, track versions, and require controlled changes via change control process.

Verification Method: Change logs for template updates and CM system audits.

Priority: Medium

SA-9

Requirement: External component usage and secure configuration of acquired components and templates.

Relevance: Applies when templates are sourced externally—requires vetting and secure configuration.

Integration Tips: Vet third-party templates, require security review before adoption, and sanitize content.

Verification Method: Supplier/component review evidence and template vetting records.

Priority: Low

6.2.9. REQ-009: Real-time collaborative editing with low-latency synchronization and conflict resolution

OWASP ASVS Controls

V10.4

Requirement: Verify secure synchronization protocols for real-time collaboration. Ensure conflict resolution preserves integrity and access control checks occur on authoritative servers.

Relevance: Directly relevant to real-time sync and conflict resolution ensuring security and integrity in collaborative edits.

Integration Tips: Use authoritative servers for conflict resolution, secure transport for sync messages, and well-defined merge semantics to avoid integrity bypass.

Verification Method: Protocol review, concurrency and conflict-resolution tests, and tamper-resistance checks.

Level: L2 | Priority: Critical

NIST SP 800-53 Controls

SC-13

Requirement: Use cryptographic mechanisms to protect the confidentiality and integrity of real-time communication and synchronization.

Relevance: Requires cryptographic protection of real-time messages used for collaborative editing.

Integration Tips: Apply TLS for transport, consider message signing and sequence integrity checks, and protect against replay attacks.

Verification Method: Network capture inspection for TLS use and message integrity test vectors.

Priority: High

ISO 27001:2022 Controls

A.14.2.5

Requirement: Ensure security in development of real-time systems including design for synchronization and conflict resolution.

Relevance: Provides organizational control over secure design and development practices for real-time components.

Integration Tips: Include threat modeling for sync protocols, code reviews for concurrency logic, and secure SDLC practices.

Verification Method: Secure design artifacts, threat models, and review of implementation against design.

Priority: High

6.2.10. REQ-010: Presence indicators and live cursors for collaborators

OWASP ASVS Controls

V10.6

Requirement: Verify that presence information and live cursors do not expose unintended PII and that disclosure is controlled by access policies and user privacy settings.

Relevance: Ensures presence and cursor data respect privacy and are restricted to authorized viewers.

Integration Tips: Allow users to opt-out of presence, limit presence visibility to team members, and avoid including personal identifiers in presence payloads.

Verification Method: Privacy tests, access control checks for presence streams, and PII scanning of presence data.

Level: L1 | Priority: High

NIST SP 800-53 Controls

AC-20

Requirement: Information sharing and collaborative capabilities must be controlled and restricted based on organizational policy to prevent unauthorized disclosure of presence data.

Relevance: Mandates control over collaborative data sharing—applies to presence indicators.

Integration Tips: Enforce sharing policies at server-side, include consent mechanisms, and log presence access.

Verification Method: Policy enforcement tests and audit logs of presence accesses.

Priority: Medium

ISO 27001:2022 Controls

A.18.1.4

Requirement: Privacy and protection of personally identifiable information shall be ensured when displaying presence or similar personal data.

Relevance: Covers legal/compliance aspects of showing personal data in presence features.

Integration Tips: Map presence data to PII policies, implement consent and data minimization, and document legal basis for presence processing.

Verification Method: Privacy impact assessment and legal/compliance review.

Priority: Medium

6.2.11. REQ-011: In-board chat, commenting, @mentions and threaded discussions

OWASP ASVS Controls

V6.3

Requirement: Verify that user-generated content (chat, comments, mentions) is properly validated and encoded to prevent XSS, injection, and other content-based attacks.

Relevance: Directly applies to preventing XSS and injection via chat/comment features.

Integration Tips: Apply strict input validation, context-aware output encoding, and sanitize mentions and rich-text formatting on the server.

Verification Method: Automated scanning for XSS, code review of sanitization functions, and fuzzing of message inputs.

Level: L1 | Priority: Critical

NIST SP 800-53 Controls

SC-8

Requirement: Protection of information at endpoints and during communication (including messaging) to ensure confidentiality and integrity.

Relevance: Requires secure transport and endpoint protections for messaging features.

Integration Tips: Use TLS for message transport, enforce authentication for chat sessions, and rate-limit to prevent spam/abuse.

Verification Method: Transport security tests, endpoint configuration reviews, and abuse/rate-limit testing.

Priority: High

SI-10

Requirement: Information input validation and sanitization, including for messaging systems and user-generated content.

Relevance: Supports input sanitization and integrity checks required for chat/comment systems.

Integration Tips: Implement sanitization libraries, validate message attachments, and monitor for malicious content patterns.

Verification Method: Sanitization unit tests and monitoring logs for detected malicious inputs.

Priority: High

6.2.12. REQ-012: Audio/video conferencing integration during sessions

OWASP ASVS Controls

V10.7

Requirement: Verify that audio/video integrations use secure transport, appropriate encryption, and do not expose streams or credentials. Consider privacy impacts and permissions for media device access.

Relevance: Directly addresses secure conferencing integration, encryption and privacy considerations.

Integration Tips: Use SRTP/DTLS or vendor-provided encrypted channels, require explicit user consent for media access, and protect tokens used for media sessions.

Verification Method: Media session capture to confirm encryption, permissions workflow tests, and credential/token leakage checks.

Level: L2 | Priority: High

NIST SP 800-53 Controls

SC-17

Requirement: Public key infrastructure and secure channels for protecting multimedia sessions and real-time data.

Relevance: Specifies cryptographic mechanisms and channel protections for media streams.

Integration Tips: Use PKI-backed TLS/DTLS certificates for servers, verify certificate pinning where appropriate, and rotate media session keys.

Verification Method: Certificate validation checks and review of crypto usage for media channels.

Priority: High

ISO 27001:2022 Controls

A.9.2.6

Requirement: Control and monitor use of audio-visual equipment to prevent unauthorized recording and disclosure.

Relevance: Addresses organizational control over AV equipment and recordings which applies to conferencing integrations.

Integration Tips: Implement recording policies, provide visible recording indicators, and restrict recording to authorized roles.

Verification Method: Policy documentation, recorded session access logs, and checks for recording consent.

Priority: Medium

6.2.13. REQ-013: Infinite canvas with pan/zoom and high-performance rendering

OWASP ASVS Controls

V14.1

Requirement: Verify that applications handle large resources and rendering efficiently and protect against resource exhaustion and DoS from large canvases or heavy client-side operations.

Relevance: Addresses resource exhaustion risks and DoS from large canvases and rendering operations.

Integration Tips: Implement server-side limits, pagination/chunking of canvas data, and client throttling; conduct performance testing under realistic loads.

Verification Method: Load testing, resource-quota tests, and DoS simulation against canvas APIs.

Level: L1 | Priority: High

NIST SP 800-53 Controls

SC-5

Requirement: Denial of service protection and resource management controls to mitigate resource exhaustion attacks.

Relevance: Requires DoS protections and resource management supporting infinite canvas stability.

Integration Tips: Deploy rate limiting, request throttling, autoscaling controls, and resource isolation for heavy operations.

Verification Method: Rate limit tests, autoscaling behavior checks, and simulated resource exhaustion testing.

Priority: Critical

ISO 27001:2022 Controls

A.12.1.3

Requirement: Capacity management to ensure systems can handle expected loads and scale to mitigate performance degradation.

Relevance: Operational guidance for capacity planning to support high-performance rendering and pan/zoom features.

Integration Tips: Implement capacity planning, monitor key metrics, and plan scaling strategies (sharding, CDN, edge caching).

Verification Method: Capacity plan review and monitoring dashboards during load testing.

Priority: Medium

6.2.14. REQ-014: Drawing and layout tools: shapes, connectors, sticky notes, text boxes, grouping, alignment, smart connectors

OWASP ASVS Controls

V6.1

Requirement: Verify that all inputs, including drawing primitives, SVG, and layout data, are validated and sanitized to prevent injection and rendering attacks.

Relevance: Applies to drawing primitives and vector formats which can be vectors for XSS or injection if not sanitized.

Integration Tips: Sanitize SVG and other vector inputs on server, validate shape parameters, and use safe rendering libraries to avoid code execution via rendering.

Verification Method: Fuzzing of shape inputs, SVG sanitizer tests, and code review for rendering pipeline.

Level: L1 | Priority: High

NIST SP 800-53 Controls

SI-10

Requirement: Input validation and sanitization to prevent malicious data from compromising system integrity.

Relevance: Reinforces need to validate drawing/layout inputs to maintain integrity.

Integration Tips: Use whitelist-based validation and keep parsing libraries up to date; perform QA tests for malicious inputs.

Verification Method: Validation test cases and library dependency management audits.

Priority: High

ISO 27001:2022 Controls

A.14.2.5

Requirement: Address security in application design and development including validation of inputs from users and external systems.

Relevance: Encourages secure design practices for interactive drawing features.

Integration Tips: Integrate security requirements into design specs, conduct threat modelling for drawing features, and include security tests in CI.

Verification Method: Design artefact review and security test coverage reports.

Priority: Medium

6.2.15. REQ-015: Embed external content (images, documents, videos, links) and support interactive widgets (voting, timers)

OWASP ASVS Controls

V6.5

Requirement: Verify that embedded third-party content is sandboxed, validated, and subject to content security policies to prevent XSS and data leakage.

Relevance: Directly applicable to embeds and interactive widgets which can introduce third-party risk and XSS.

Integration Tips: Use iframe sandboxing, strict Content Security Policy, sanitize embed parameters, and limit widget privileges via capability scoping.

Verification Method: CSP and sandbox tests, iframe attribute checks, and pentest attempts to escape sandbox.

Level: L2 | Priority: Critical

NIST SP 800-53 Controls

SA-12

Requirement: Controls for using third-party services and components including vetting and security requirements for embeds and widgets.

Relevance: Covers supplier/third-party risk when embedding external content or widgets.

Integration Tips: Vet widget providers, require security SLAs, and isolate widgets to minimize blast radius.

Verification Method: Third-party risk assessments and contractual evidence of security requirements.

Priority: High

SC-7

Requirement: Boundary protection and segregation of third-party content to limit exposure to the system.

Relevance: Recommends segregation and boundary controls for third-party content integration.

Integration Tips: Use content proxies, sanitize and rehost untrusted content where possible, and limit cross-origin privileges.

Verification Method: Network segregation review and content proxy configuration inspection.

Priority: High

6.2.16. REQ-016: File upload and asset management with common format support (PNG, JPG, PDF, DOCX, etc.)

OWASP ASVS Controls

V6.6

Requirement: Verify secure file upload handling: validate content-types, perform virus/malware scanning, store files safely, and enforce size/format restrictions.

Relevance: Directly covers secure handling of uploads and asset stores for the specified file types.

Integration Tips: Validate MIME types and file signatures, integrate anti-malware scanning, store files in isolated object storage with least privilege, and enforce strict size/format policies.

Verification Method: Upload fuzzing, malware scan logs review, and access control checks for stored assets.

Level: L2 | Priority: Critical

NIST SP 800-53 Controls

SI-3

Requirement: Malicious code protection: Employ anti-malware tools for files and attachments, and validate uploaded content.

Relevance: Mandates protective controls against malicious content in uploaded files.

Integration Tips: Integrate industry-standard malware scanners into upload pipeline and re-scan files on access where possible.

Verification Method: Malware detection logs and testing with known-malicious samples in safe environment.

Priority: High

SC-28

Requirement: Protection of information at rest: encryption and access control for stored files and assets.

Relevance: Ensures stored files are protected by encryption and access controls.

Integration Tips: Encrypt assets at rest using KMS-backed keys and enforce object storage ACLs mapped to application RBAC.

Verification Method: Storage encryption configuration review and ACL policy tests.

Priority: High

6.2.17. REQ-017: Export boards as images or PDFs and support version control for uploaded files

OWASP ASVS Controls

V10.2

Requirement: Verify secure export functionality to prevent unintended data leakage. Ensure exports respect access controls, include watermarking or redaction where needed, and are logged.

Relevance: Directly relevant to secure export (PDF/images) and preventing data leakage during export operations.

Integration Tips: Enforce access checks prior to export, include optional watermarking for sensitive exports, and log/export operations with owner info.

Verification Method: Attempt unauthorized exports, review export logs, and confirm watermarking/redaction applies when configured.

Level: L2 | Priority: High

NIST SP 800-53 Controls

MP-6

Requirement: Media sanitization and protection during transfer including control over exportable content and integrity checks.

Relevance: Ensures media/exported files are handled securely during transfer and storage.

Integration Tips: Use secure transfer channels, perform integrity checks on generated exports, and manage retention and disposal of exported files.

Verification Method: Transport encryption checks and integrity verification of exported files.

Priority: Medium

SI-12 (1)

Requirement: Prevent unauthorized data exfiltration by controlling export mechanisms and monitoring exports.

Relevance: Specifies controls to avoid exports becoming a data exfiltration channel.

Integration Tips: Alert on bulk export activity, apply rate-limits for exports, and require elevated permissions for exports of sensitive data.

Verification Method: Monitoring rules tests and simulated bulk-export detection exercises.

Priority: High

6.2.18. REQ-018: Integrations with productivity tools (Jira, Asana, Trello), cloud storage (Google Drive, Dropbox, OneDrive), and communication platforms (Slack, Teams)

OWASP ASVS Controls

V9.1

Requirement: Verify secure integration with third-party services: least privilege scopes, secure token handling, and revocation mechanisms for connected apps.

Relevance: Directly covers secure connectors and OAuth scope management for integrations.

Integration Tips: Request minimal OAuth scopes, store third-party tokens securely with rotation, and provide admin controls to revoke integrations.

Verification Method: OAuth scope audits, token storage review, and revocation workflow tests.

Level: L2 | Priority: Critical

NIST SP 800-53 Controls

SA-9

Requirement: Ensure security requirements for external system integrations and component acquisition; vet third-party services.

Relevance: Mandates vetting and contractual controls for third-party integrations.

Integration Tips: Perform security assessments of integration partners and include security SLAs in agreements.

Verification Method: Supplier assessment records and contractual evidence.

Priority: High

ISO 27001:2022 Controls

A.15.1.1

Requirement: Identify and manage security within supplier relationships, including third-party integration agreements and controls.

Relevance: Provides governance for supplier and integration security, applicable to tool integrations.

Integration Tips: Maintain inventory of integrations, apply SLA/security clauses, and monitor integration activity.

Verification Method: Integration inventory and supplier security review evidence.

Priority: Medium

6.2.19. REQ-019: Public API for custom integrations and automation with secure token management

OWASP ASVS Controls

V9.2

Requirement: Verify secure API authentication and token management: use OAuth2, rotate and revoke credentials, and implement scopes and rate limits.

Relevance: Directly applies to public API authentication, token lifecycle, and scope enforcement.

Integration Tips: Issue OAuth2 tokens with short lifetimes and refresh tokens, implement revocation endpoints, and store secrets securely in KMS.

Verification Method: API token lifecycle tests, revocation checks, and penetration tests on API auth endpoints.

Level: L2 | Priority: Critical

NIST SP 800-53 Controls

IA-5

Requirement: Authenticator management for APIs and services including token issuance and lifecycle.

Relevance: Mandates management of authenticators used by APIs which is core to secure token management.

Integration Tips: Define token issuance policies, rotate keys, and monitor token usage for anomalies.

Verification Method: Review of token issuance logs, rotation schedules, and anomaly detection alerts.

Priority: High

SC-23

Requirement: Session and connection controls for managing API sessions and tokens including timeouts and revocation.

Relevance: Supports session control and lifecycle handling for API tokens.

Integration Tips: Enforce token timeouts, implement token revocation endpoints, and log session/token-related events.

Verification Method: Session/token tests and review of revocation workflow.

Priority: High

6.2.20. REQ-020: Fine-grained access control and ownership transfer for boards

OWASP ASVS Controls

V4.6

Requirement: Verify fine-grained authorization controls and ownership transfer mechanisms. Ensure delegation, transfer, and revocation are auditable and enforced server-side.

Relevance: Directly mandates server-enforced fine-grained ACLs and auditable ownership transfer workflows.

Integration Tips: Provide ACL models with explicit owner fields, require confirmation/authorization for transfers, and log transfer events.

Verification Method: Ownership transfer tests, ACL enforcement tests, and audit log inspection for transfer events.

Level: L2 | Priority: Critical

NIST SP 800-53 Controls

AC-5

Requirement: Separation of duties and explicit delegation mechanisms to support transferable ownership and delegated privileges.

Relevance: Supports delegation and separation of duties needed when transferring ownership.

Integration Tips: Implement approval workflows for delegation and use role separation to prevent conflicts of interest.

Verification Method: Review delegation workflows and test separation of duties constraints.

Priority: High

AU-6

Requirement: Audit record generation and analysis for reporting systems and dashboards; ensure integrity and controlled access.

Relevance: Requires auditability for ownership transfer and ACL changes.

Integration Tips: Ensure ownership transfers create immutable audit events with actor and timestamp and retain them per retention policy.

Verification Method: Audit log review and correlation of ownership change events.

Priority: High

6.2.21. REQ-021: Audit logging for user activity, changes, and administrative actions

OWASP ASVS Controls

V11.1

Requirement: Verify audit logging captures user activities, administrative actions, and critical changes; logs are tamper-evident and protected.

Relevance: Direct mapping for audit logging requirements in the high-level list.

Integration Tips: Log auth events, CRUD operations, and admin actions to immutable sinks (WORM or append-only), protect logs, and forward to centralized SIEM.

Verification Method: Log sampling and tamper tests, SIEM configuration review, and retention checks.

Level: L2 | Priority: Critical

NIST SP 800-53 Controls

AU-2

Requirement: Audit events: The organization defines auditable events and records user activities and administrative actions.

Relevance: Specifies which events to capture and how to manage them—applies to all audit logging needs.

Integration Tips: Define auditable events matrix, implement reliable logging, and include timestamps and actor identifiers.

Verification Method: Event coverage reviews and checking logs for required fields.

Priority: Critical

AU-9

Requirement: Protection of audit information: logs must be protected from unauthorized access and tampering.

Relevance: Ensures logs are secure which is critical for trustworthy audit trails.

Integration Tips: Restrict log access, use checksums/signing for tamper detection, and separate duties for log management.

Verification Method: Access control review on log stores and integrity-check implementation tests.

Priority: High

6.2.22. REQ-022: Configurable notifications (in-app, email) and integration-driven notifications (Slack, Teams)

OWASP ASVS Controls

V10.9

Requirement: Verify notification mechanisms respect privacy settings and do not leak sensitive information. Provide user-configurable preferences and secure delivery channels.

Relevance: Directly applies to notifications and their privacy/security implications.

Integration Tips: Allow fine-grained notification preferences, redact sensitive content in notifications, and use secure channels for delivery (TLS, signed webhooks).

Verification Method: Review notification templates for PII, test opt-in/opt-out flows, and inspect webhook signing.

Level: L1 | Priority: High

NIST SP 800-53 Controls

PL-4

Requirement: Define notification and communication policies including handling of sensitive data in notifications.

Relevance: Encourages organizational policy controlling notification contents and channels.

Integration Tips: Document allowed notification types, classify sensitive content, and implement checks to prevent sensitive fields in messages.

Verification Method: Policy existence check and sample notification content review.

Priority: Medium

ISO 27001:2022 Controls

A.18.1.3

Requirement: Privacy compliance and controls for processing personal data in communications and notifications.

Relevance: Ensures notifications comply with privacy requirements when transmitting personal data.

Integration Tips: Document legal basis for sending notifications, obtain consents where required, and provide data minimization in notifications.

Verification Method: Privacy impact assessment and consent records.

Priority: Medium

6.2.23. REQ-023: Performance and scalability goals: horizontal scaling, efficient sync, conflict resolution, and large-board performance

OWASP ASVS Controls

V14.3

Requirement: Verify design for horizontal scalability, efficient synchronization, and resource isolation to maintain security and performance under load.

Relevance: Directly covers scalability, sync efficiency, and resource isolation required for high-performance collaborative systems.

Integration Tips: Design stateless services, use sharding/partitioning for large boards, instrument sync performance, and ensure security controls scale with capacity.

Verification Method: Scalability/load tests and review of architecture for statelessness and partitioning.

Level: L1 | Priority: High

NIST SP 800-53 Controls

CP-2

Requirement: Contingency and continuity planning for maintaining operations during scaling events and failures.

Relevance: Requires plans to maintain service during scaling/failure events to meet availability targets.

Integration Tips: Develop contingency plans for scale events, test failover and degradation scenarios, and include performance SLAs in runbooks.

Verification Method: Contingency plan tests and failover simulation outcomes.

Priority: High

ISO 27001:2022 Controls

A.12.1.3

Requirement: Capacity and performance management to ensure systems can scale and meet performance/security requirements.

Relevance: Operational control for capacity planning and ongoing performance management.

Integration Tips: Maintain capacity forecasts, automated scaling triggers, and continuous monitoring of sync latencies for large boards.

Verification Method: Capacity planning evidence and monitoring dashboards.

Priority: Medium

6.2.24. REQ-024: Reporting and analytics (usage, activity logs, license/admin dashboards) with export capability

OWASP ASVS Controls

V11.4

Requirement: Verify that reporting and analytics systems protect aggregated data, prevent leakage of PII, and support secure export and access controls.

Relevance: Applies to dashboards, exports and analytics with privacy and access concerns.

Integration Tips: Apply role-based access to dashboards, anonymize/pseudonymize PII in reports, and control export rights with audit logging.

Verification Method: Report content reviews for PII, access control tests, and export permission tests.

Level: L1 | Priority: High

NIST SP 800-53 Controls

AU-6

Requirement: Audit record generation and analysis for reporting systems and dashboards; ensure integrity and controlled access.

Relevance: Ensures analytics derive from trustworthy audit records and logs are protected.

Integration Tips: Ensure logs feeding analytics are integrity-protected and limit access to analytics data based on roles.

Verification Method: Validation of log feed integrity and access control audits on dashboards.

Priority: High

ISO 27001:2022 Controls

A.18.1.4

Requirement: Privacy requirements for processing personal data in reporting and analytics.

Relevance: Ensures compliance for analytics involving personal data, including exports.

Integration Tips: Maintain data processing records, implement pseudonymization, and enforce retention/erasures as required.

Verification Method: DPIA results and data processing records.

Priority: Medium

6.2.25. REQ-025: Operational capabilities: backups, restore, monitoring, rate limiting, and DDoS mitigation

OWASP ASVS Controls

V14.5

Requirement: Verify backup, restore, monitoring, rate limiting, and DoS mitigation are implemented to maintain availability and integrity of data and services.

Relevance: Directly maps to the operational capabilities requested, ensuring resilience and protection from DoS and data loss.

Integration Tips: Implement automated backups with periodic restore tests, centralized monitoring and alerting, rate limiting at API gateways, and DDoS protection (WAF/CDN).

Verification Method: Restore drills, monitoring configuration review, rate-limit effectiveness testing, and DDoS response exercises.

Level: L2 | Priority: Critical

NIST SP 800-53 Controls

CP-9

Requirement: Information system backup: ensure backups are performed, tested, and restorations validated to maintain data availability.

Relevance: Mandates backups and restore validation as part of contingency planning.

Integration Tips: Schedule regular backups, encrypt backups, and maintain tested restore procedures in runbooks.

Verification Method: Backup/restore test records and integrity checks.

Priority: High

SC-5

Requirement: Denial of service protection and resource management controls for mitigating large-scale attacks.

Relevance: Specifies protections to mitigate DDoS—including rate limiting and resource management.

Integration Tips: Deploy API rate limiting, autoscaling, network-layer DDoS protections (scrubbing services) and implement resource quotas per tenant.

Verification Method: DDoS simulation tests, rate-limit verification and resource isolation tests.

Priority: High

ISO 27001:2022 Controls

A.17.1.2

Requirement: Implement information security continuity including backup and restore procedures and protection against disruptions.

Relevance: Provides continuity planning guidance that includes backups and protection against disruptions like DDoS.

Integration Tips: Integrate information security into business continuity plans, test continuity plans regularly, and ensure roles are assigned for restore operations.

Verification Method: Business continuity test evidence and recovery time objective (RTO) verification.

Priority: Medium

6.3. Cross-Functional Security Controls

The following controls apply globally across all system components:

Logging and Monitoring

Description: Centralized logging, tamper-evident logs, SIEM ingestion, alerting and retention policies to detect and investigate security events.

Applies to: Audit logging for user activity, changes, and administrative actions, Operational capabilities: backups, restore, monitoring, rate limiting, and DDoS mitigation, Real-time collaborative editing, Public API

Implementation Guidance: Forward application, auth, and infrastructure logs to a centralized, access-controlled SIEM. Sign or checksum logs to detect tampering, configure alerts for anomalous activity, and retain logs per policy for forensic needs.

Encryption (Transport and At-Rest)

Description: Use strong TLS for all transports and encrypt sensitive data at rest using KMS-managed keys to protect confidentiality and integrity.

Applies to: User registration and login, Board sharing controls, File upload and asset management, Public API, Audio/video conferencing integration

Implementation Guidance: Enforce TLS 1.2+ with secure cipher suites, use KMS for key management, rotate keys regularly, and apply envelope encryption for large assets.

Input Validation and Output Encoding

Description: Validate and sanitize all inputs and apply context-aware output encoding to prevent XSS, injection, and malformed data affecting rendering.

Applies to: In-board chat, commenting, Drawing and layout tools, Embed external content, File upload

Implementation Guidance: Adopt whitelist validation, use proven sanitizer libraries for HTML/SVG, and encode outputs per context (HTML, JS, URL).

Access Control and Authorization

Description: Enforce server-side RBAC/ACL checks, least privilege, ownership controls and auditable delegation/transfer mechanisms.

Applies to: Team and workspace management, Create/edit/delete boards, Fine-grained access control, Export and sharing

Implementation Guidance: Centralize authorization logic, maintain role/permission matrices, protect admin functions, and log/monitor changes to access control policies.

6.4. Requirements Traceability Overview

This section demonstrates complete traceability from high-level requirements through threats to security controls and verification methods.

Coverage Summary: Traceability matrix contains 30 requirements. 30 requirements (100.0%) linked to threats. 26 requirements (86.7%) mapped to security controls (OWASP ASVS, NIST SP 800-53, ISO 27001). Coverage: Partial.

Sample Traceability Mappings

The following table shows traceability for high-priority requirements:

Req ID	Requirement	Threats	Security Controls	Standards	Priority	Verification
REQ-001	User registration and authentication sup…	10 threats	3 controls	ISO27001, NIST, OWASP	Critical	Review identity management design, test MFA enforcement, and audit federated authentication configurations and logs.
REQ-002	Team and workspace creation and manageme…	7 threats	3 controls	NIST, OWASP	Critical	Review account management procedures, test provisioning/deprovisioning, and inspect audit logs for role change events.
REQ-005	Create, edit, duplicate, and delete boar…	10 threats	3 controls	ISO27001, NIST, OWASP	Critical	Authorization unit tests, access control matrix validation, and privilege escalation pentesting.
REQ-007	Manage sharing options per board: privat…	10 threats	3 controls	NIST, OWASP	Critical	Cryptography configuration review and TLS/URL signing tests.
REQ-008	Version history, undo/redo capabilities …	10 threats	3 controls	NIST, OWASP	Critical	Backup logs, restoration tests, and integrity verification of restored versions.
REQ-010	Real-time collaboration with multiple us…	10 threats	3 controls	ISO27001, NIST, OWASP	Critical	Secure design artifacts, threat models, and review of implementation against design.
REQ-012	In-board chat, commenting, threaded disc…	2 threats	3 controls	NIST, OWASP	Critical	Automated scanning for XSS, code review of sanitization functions, and fuzzing of message inputs.
REQ-014	Infinite canvas with smooth pan/zoom and…	4 threats	3 controls	ISO27001, NIST, OWASP	Critical	Capacity plan review and monitoring dashboards during load testing.
REQ-016	Embedding external content (images, docu…	10 threats	3 controls	NIST, OWASP	Critical	Third-party risk assessments and contractual evidence of security requirements.
REQ-017	Interactive widgets (voting, timers) tha…	10 threats	3 controls	NIST, OWASP	Critical	Third-party risk assessments and contractual evidence of security requirements.

Showing 10 of 30 requirements. See Appendix D for complete traceability matrix.

Traceability Statistics

• Total Requirements Tracked: 30
• Requirements Linked to Threats: 30 (100.0%)
• Requirements Mapped to Controls: 26 (86.7%)
• Average Controls per Requirement: 2.6
• Control Distribution by Standard:
  • NIST SP 800-53: 39 controls
  • OWASP ASVS: 26 controls
  • ISO 27001: 14 controls
• Verification Coverage: 100% (all requirements have verification methods)

---

7. AI/ML Security Requirements

This section addresses security requirements specific to artificial intelligence and machine learning components within the system. AI/ML systems introduce unique security challenges including prompt injection attacks, data poisoning, model theft, adversarial inputs, and bias vulnerabilities. This analysis identifies AI/ML components, assesses their security risks, and prescribes specialized controls to protect both the AI systems themselves and the data they process.

7.1. AI/ML Components Detected

This section identifies all AI/ML components within the system that require specialized security controls.
1. Real-time Collaboration Features: Leveraging AI for low-latency updates and conflict resolution among multiple users editing a board simultaneously.
2. In-board Chat and Commenting Functionality: Potentially utilizing natural language processing to understand and manage user interactions, including mentions and threaded discussions.
3. Interactive Widgets: Features such as voting and timers may leverage AI to enhance user engagement and interaction dynamics.
4. API for Custom Integrations: Could include AI-driven features or integrations that interact with external AI models for enhanced functionality.

7.2. AI/ML Threat Model

Component	Identified Threats
Real-time Collaboration Features	- Prompt injection
	- Adversarial inputs
In-board Chat and Commenting	- Data leakage (PII exposure)
	- Prompt injection
Interactive Widgets	- Input validation for AI inputs
	- Adversarial inputs
API for Custom Integrations	- Model access controls
	- Supply chain vulnerabilities

7.3. AI/ML Security Controls

Real-time Collaboration Features

• Input Validation: Ensure all inputs from users are sanitized and validated to prevent prompt injection attacks.
  
• Output Filtering: Implement output filtering to sanitize responses before displaying them to users, mitigating the risk of harmful or sensitive content being shown.
  
• Monitoring for Adversarial Inputs: Continuously monitor for unusual patterns in user interactions that may indicate adversarial attacks or attempts to manipulate the system.

In-board Chat and Commenting

• Prompt Injection Prevention: Use context-aware filtering mechanisms to eliminate the risk of prompt injection through chat messages or comments.
  
• Data Leakage Prevention: Implement strict data handling policies and monitoring to ensure that personally identifiable information (PII) is not inadvertently shared through chat or comments.

Interactive Widgets

• Adversarial Input Detection: Use machine learning models to identify and flag potentially malicious input patterns in voting or timer features.
  
• Input Validation: Validate inputs received by interactive widgets to ensure they conform to expected formats and ranges.

API for Custom Integrations

• Model Access Controls: Enforce strict access control policies on APIs to limit which users or applications can invoke AI features.
  
• Supply Chain Security: Assess and validate third-party integrations for compliance with security standards to mitigate risks associated with external AI models.

7.4. Integration with Existing Security Controls

The specialized AI/ML security controls can be integrated with existing security practices by aligning them with the overall security framework of the application. For instance, input validation and output filtering can be incorporated into the application’s standard data handling practices. Additionally, monitoring for adversarial inputs can complement existing logging and alerting mechanisms to ensure a comprehensive security posture.

7.5. AI/ML Monitoring Requirements

Monitoring Area	Description
Input Validation	Monitor user inputs for compliance with validation rules.
Output Filtering	Track filtered outputs to ensure no harmful content is displayed.
User Interaction Patterns	Analyze patterns of user interactions to identify potential adversarial attacks.
API Access Logs	Maintain logs of API calls to detect unauthorized access attempts.

---

8. Compliance Requirements

This section identifies regulatory and legal compliance obligations applicable to the system based on data types, geographic scope, industry sector, and business operations. Compliance requirements drive specific security controls, data handling procedures, audit capabilities, and privacy protections. Non-compliance can result in significant legal penalties, reputational damage, and business disruption. This analysis maps applicable regulations to specific security requirements and operational procedures.

8.1. Applicable Regulations

The collaborative whiteboarding application processes various types of data, which triggers compliance obligations under multiple regulations. As the platform involves user registration, communication, and collaboration functionalities, it handles personal data, potentially health-related data, and may need to comply with payment security standards if payment functionalities are integrated. The geographic scope of users and the nature of industry operations further define the applicable regulations. Compliance requirements directly impact security controls, data handling procedures, and operational processes, necessitating a thorough understanding of the regulatory landscape.

Regulation	Applicability Reason
GDPR	Applies because the system processes personal data of EU residents, including names, emails, and collaborative content.
CCPA	Applies as the platform collects personal data of California residents and provides specific rights regarding such data.
HIPAA	May apply if the application handles health-related information, especially if used by healthcare organizations.
PCI-DSS	Relevant if any payment card data is processed through the platform, necessitating stringent security controls.
SOX	Applies if the application handles financial reporting data or is used by publicly traded companies.
COPPA	Necessary if the application targets children under 13, requiring parental consent for data collection.
Data Residency Laws	Relevant based on the geographic location of users and where data is processed or stored.

8.2. Compliance Controls by Regulation

GDPR

• Implement data protection by design and by default.
• Conduct Data Protection Impact Assessments (DPIAs) for high-risk processing activities.
• Ensure clear and concise privacy notices are provided to users at registration.
• Implement user consent mechanisms for data processing.

CCPA

• Provide users with the right to know what personal information is collected and how it is used.
• Allow users to opt-out of the sale of their personal data.
• Maintain records of consumer requests and responses for at least 24 months.

HIPAA

• Implement administrative, physical, and technical safeguards to protect health information.
• Conduct regular risk assessments and audits for compliance.
• Ensure business associate agreements are in place with third-party vendors that handle health data.

PCI-DSS

• Encrypt cardholder data during transmission and at rest.
• Implement access control measures to restrict access to cardholder data.
• Regularly monitor and test networks for vulnerabilities.

SOX

• Ensure accurate financial reporting and data integrity within the application.
• Implement internal controls over financial reporting and regularly audit compliance.

COPPA

• Obtain verifiable parental consent before collecting personal information from children under 13.
• Provide clear information about the types of data collected from children.

Data Residency Laws

• Implement data localization strategies to ensure data is stored and processed in compliance with local laws.

8.3. Data Subject Rights

Right	Description
Right to Access	Users have the right to request access to their personal data.
Right to Rectification	Users can request correction of inaccurate personal data.
Right to Erasure	Users can request deletion of their personal data under certain conditions.
Right to Data Portability	Users can request their data in a structured format to transfer to another service.
Right to Object	Users can object to the processing of their personal data for marketing purposes.

8.4. Privacy Requirements

Consent: Users must provide explicit consent for data processing, especially for sensitive data types.
Privacy Notices: Clear and transparent privacy notices must be presented to users upon registration detailing data collection and usage.
User Options: Users should have the ability to manage their consent preferences and opt-out of non-essential data processing.

8.5. Audit and Monitoring Requirements

Logging: The application must keep detailed logs of user activities, changes, and access to sensitive data for compliance reviews.
Monitoring: Regular monitoring of access controls and data handling procedures should be in place to ensure compliance with regulations.

8.6. Data Handling Rules

Retention: Personal data should be retained only as long as necessary for its intended purpose and in compliance with applicable laws.
Deletion: Implement procedures for timely deletion of data upon user request or when it is no longer needed.

8.7. Compliance Risk Assessment

The collaborative whiteboarding application faces various compliance risks associated with the handling of personal and sensitive data. It is crucial to identify and mitigate these risks to avoid legal repercussions and ensure user trust.

Key Compliance Risks:

• Risk of unauthorized access to personal data due to inadequate security controls.

• Risk of non-compliance with user consent requirements leading to regulatory fines.

• Risk of improper data retention practices resulting in legal liability.

---

9. Security Architecture Recommendations

This section provides comprehensive security architecture guidance that integrates security controls into the system’s technical design. Security architecture defines how security principles, controls, and patterns are applied across system components to create a cohesive, defense-in-depth security posture. The recommendations address architectural principles, component-level controls, data protection strategies, and third-party integration security to ensure security is built into the system design.

9.1. Architectural Security Principles

Architectural security principles provide the foundational philosophy guiding all security design decisions. These principles ensure consistent security posture across all system components and guide the selection and implementation of security controls, trade-offs, and operational practices for the collaborative whiteboarding platform.

• Zero Trust Architecture principles: Never trust, always verify. All access requests — regardless of network location or client type — must be authenticated, authorized, and continuously validated to reduce implicit trust and lateral movement risk.
• Defense in Depth: Apply multiple, independent layers of security controls (network, platform, application, data) so that failure or compromise of one control does not result in total system compromise.
• Principle of Least Privilege: Grant users, services, and integrations only the minimum privileges required to perform their tasks; use time-limited elevation where needed.
• Secure by Default / Secure by Design: Configure secure defaults, remove unnecessary services, embed security controls in architecture and CI/CD pipelines, and require explicit opt-in for weaker behavior.
• Separation of Duties: Separate sensitive functions (e.g., key management, audit log administration, privileged role assignments) to reduce insider risk and support accountability.
• Fail Secure: On failures (authentication, authorization, key validation), default to deny access or block actions rather than permit, avoiding insecure fallbacks.
• Complete Mediation: Enforce authorization checks on every access request at the authoritative server-side enforcement point; never trust client-side checks alone.
• Defense-in-Depth for Data (Data-Centric Security): Protect data at collection, transit, processing, storage, and export with classification, encryption, and access controls.
• Immutable and Auditable Operations: Maintain tamper-evident audit trails, immutable versioning metadata, and signed events for critical actions (ownership transfer, sharing changes, exports).
• Least Exposed Surface: Minimize externally reachable APIs, use gateways and edge protections, and restrict cross-origin and embedding privileges.
• Design for Privacy: Data minimization, user consent, configurable privacy settings (presence, visibility), and support for legal requests (erasure, export).
• Operational Resilience and Observability: Monitor security signals, test backups and disaster recovery, and integrate security gates into runbooks and SRE/DevOps workflows.

---

9.2. Component-Level Security Controls

Frontend Layer

Required Controls:

• Content Security Policy (CSP) enforcing allowed sources and disallowing unsafe-inline where possible.
• Strict input validation and context-aware output encoding for any user-supplied content (text, markup, SVG).
• Protection of local caches (encryption for stored offline data where applicable) and secure storage APIs (IndexedDB/Keychain use).
• Secure handling of auth tokens: use short-lived tokens, refresh via secure channels, and store tokens in secure storage (secure HTTP-only cookies or platform keychain).
• UI-level privacy controls (presence opt-out) and explicit consent flows for media device access.
• Rate limiting and client-side throttling to protect local and upstream services from runaway operations.
• Local integrity checks for code-signed native apps; enforce update signature checks for desktop/mobile clients.

Recommended Patterns:

• Serve static assets via CDN with edge WAF and signed URLs.
• Use secure storage APIs (IndexedDB + encryption in browser for sensitive caches) and platform keychains for native clients.
• Use token exchange via back-end to front-end (no long-lived secrets in JS bundles).
• Implement local optimistic UI patterns with server authoritative reconciliation.

Edge & Auth

Required Controls:

• Terminate TLS at the edge with only TLS 1.2+ (prefer TLS 1.3) and secure cipher suites (AEAD).
• WAF for HTTP/S with OWASP rulesets and custom rules for API patterns and uploads.
• Centralized authentication gateway supporting OIDC/SAML, OAuth2 authorization server flows, MFA, session management and single logout.
• Rate limiting, API quotas and per-tenant throttling at the gateway.
• Abuse protection (IP reputation, bot detection) and DDoS mitigation (CDN scrubbing and rate-limit escalation).
• Strong token validation (aud/iss/exp/nonce checks), short token lifetimes and refresh token rotation.
• Centralized logging of authentication and access events to SIEM with tamper-evident write path.

Recommended Patterns:

• API Gateway / Auth Proxy performing authentication, authorization policy enforcement, TLS termination, and routing.
• Use an identity provider for SSO and optionally support SCIM for provisioning.
• Enable mutual TLS (mTLS) for internal service-to-service connections and highly sensitive integrations.
• Use JWKS endpoint rotation and key rotation automation.

Application Services

Required Controls:

• Centralized authorization service (policy decision point) with consistent RBAC/ACL evaluation for object-level authorization.
• Input sanitization and contextual encoding for all user-generated content (chat, comments, SVG, embeds).
• Enforce server-side conflict resolution for realtime operations (authoritative merge/CRDT/OT logic verification).
• Per-tenant rate limits, quotas and resource isolation for large boards (sharding/partitioning).
• Secure secrets management for integration credentials and tokens (store in KMS/Secret Manager).
• Service-level telemetry, structured logging (excluding PII), and real-time anomaly detection for suspicious collaboration patterns.
• Media handling isolation: dedicated media processing pipelines and transient storage with strict ACLs.
• Message signing/sequence verification for realtime messages to detect replay/tampering where applicable.

Recommended Patterns:

• Microservices architecture with stateless front-facing services and stateful specialized services (realtime, media, file ingestion).
• Realtime Sync implemented using CRDT/OT with server authoritative checkpoints and signed deltas for integrity.
• Service mesh (or mTLS) for secure intra-service communication, observability, and policy enforcement.
• Sidecar pattern for per-service telemetry, rate-limiting and local WAF-like protections.

Data Layer

Required Controls:

• Encrypted object storage for assets (AES-256-GCM envelope encryption) with per-tenant key separation where required.
• Relational/document DB encryption at rest, row-level security for multi-tenant separation, and DB connection encryption.
• Append-only, tamper-evident audit/log store (WORM or cryptographic chaining/signatures).
• Backups encrypted and access-controlled; periodic restore testing; retention and disposal policies applied.
• KMS/HSM backed key management with automated rotation and separation of duties for key operators.
• Data classification metadata stored alongside objects and enforced by access control checks.

Recommended Patterns:

• Envelope encryption with KMS for CEKs and CMKs stored in HSM-backed KMS.
• Use managed DBs with IAM-based access, TLS connections and fine-grained IAM roles.
• Immutable ledger-like storage or cryptographic signing for version metadata.
• Cache layer (Redis/Memcache) with access controls and TTL to avoid persistent sensitive data.

External Services

Required Controls:

• OAuth2/OIDC integration with minimal scopes; token storage encrypted and revocable by admin.
• Verification of third-party webhook signatures and use of signed responses from partners.
• Vetting and contractual SLAs for third parties including security and breach notification requirements.
• Isolation of third-party content through proxies, rehosting, or sandboxed iframes and strict CSP.
• Monitoring and anomaly detection of integration tokens usage and outbound API calls.

Recommended Patterns:

• Use service-specific connectors running in isolated integration services or functions.
• Employ gateway-level allowlists for IPs/callback URLs and mTLS for high-risk partners.
• Implement per-integration token rotation and admin revocation functions exposed in the admin console.
• Content proxy that scans downloads/uploads for malware and strips dangerous metadata.

---

9.3. Data Protection Strategy

Data Classification: Public, Internal, Confidential, Restricted

• Public: Board templates (non-sensitive), marketing pages, docs intentionally published.
• Internal: Usage metrics, non-identifying telemetry, non-sensitive org-level metadata.
• Confidential: User PII (name, email), team membership, boards marked internal, non-sensitive uploaded assets.
• Restricted: Highly sensitive boards or assets (legal, HR), audit logs, authentication secrets, integration tokens, encryption keys.

Encryption Requirements:

• Data in transit:
  • TLS 1.3 recommended; TLS 1.2 minimum with only secure ciphers (AEAD suites).
  • Use HSTS, strong cipher configuration and certificate management (short lifetime certificates, automated renewal).
  • For real-time media: DTLS-SRTP or vendor-provided end-to-end encryption where feasible.
• Data at rest:
  • Use AES-256-GCM for object storage and database disk encryption.
  • Use envelope encryption: CEKs (AES-256) encrypted by KMS-managed CMKs.
  • Sensitive fields (PII, tokens) encrypted at application layer (field-level encryption) with per-tenant or per-purpose keys.
• Key and signing algorithms:
  • KMS/ HSM for CMKs, rotate keys at least annually or per policy.
  • JWT signing: prefer RS256 or ES256 with private keys in KMS/HSM.
  • Password hashing: Argon2id with memory/time parameters tuned to environment (avoid outdated PBKDF2/BCrypt if Argon2 supported).
  • Hash integrity: HMAC-SHA256 for message signatures, TLS-level integrity for transport.
• Optional E2EE:
  • Offer optional end-to-end encrypted boards for customers with highest confidentiality needs. Manage keys client-side; limit server operations (no server-side indexing/search for E2EE boards).

Retention Policies:

• Board content:
  • Default retention: retain active board content while the workspace exists. Soft-delete retention window (e.g., 30 days) before permanent deletion unless legal hold applied.
  • Allow orgs to configure retention (e.g., 90 days to 7 years) to meet compliance needs.
• Audit logs:
  • Retain critical security and admin logs for at least 1 year by default; for enterprise/regulatory customers retain up to 7 years per contractual/legal requirements.
• Backups:
  • Maintain backup snapshots per backup policy (daily/weekly as required) and retain for a period aligning with retention (e.g., 90 days for standard, configurable for enterprise).
• PII and account data:
  • Support right-to-be-forgotten requests; delete personal data within agreed SLA, maintain pseudonymized records for audit if required.
• Exported files:
  • Temporary exports stored in signed URLs with short TTL (e.g., 1 hour). If persisted, subject to asset retention policy.

Handling Procedures:

• Access:
  • Enforce RBAC and ACL checks for all accesses. Use central policy decision point with consistent enforcement.
  • All privileged actions require MFA and just-in-time privilege elevation where feasible.
  • Maintain least-privilege IAM roles for services and human operators.
• Transmission:
  • All endpoints enforce TLS. Use signed URLs for direct object access; require token binding on downloads for sensitive assets.
  • Validate and sanitize all inbound content (file headers, MIME types, magic bytes).
• Storage:
  • Store files in segregated buckets per region/tenant if data residency required. Use server-side encryption plus application-level encryption for restricted data.
• Deletion:
  • Implement secure deletion flows with overwrite or cryptographic key deletion to irreversibly render data inaccessible (cryptographic erase) and audit deletion events.
  • Support and document deletion and retention exceptions (legal hold).
• Backups & DR:
  • Encrypt backups, limit access to backup decryption keys, test restore procedures quarterly, and maintain documented RTO/RPO.
• Versioning:
  • Maintain immutable version metadata for board operations in a tamper-evident store; restrict restore permissions and log restores.
• Logging & Monitoring:
  • Log access to sensitive data, mask PII in logs by default, and enable verbose logging for admin/audit events only accessible to authorized investigators.
• Data Minimization:
  • Do not automatically include full board content in notifications. Redact or summarize sensitive content in notifications; allow configurable notification rules per org.

---

9.4. Third-Party Integration Security

Identity Providers (Google, Microsoft, SAML IdPs)

Security Requirements:

• Use OIDC or SAML with validated tokens and configured audience/issuer checks.
• Enforce MFA policies across federated sign-ins where organization requires it.
• SCIM provisioning for automated user lifecycle where supported.
• Support for IdP-initiated sign-out and session revocation.

Risk Assessment: High - Identity providers are critical for authentication; misconfiguration can lead to user impersonation or unauthorized access.

Recommended Controls:

• Validate ID tokens (nonce, aud, iss, signature) on every exchange.
• Use short-lived tokens and map federated attributes to internal RBAC cautiously.
• Implement automated tests for IdP metadata rotation and certificate expiry.
• Maintain contractual requirements and SCIM deprovisioning integration to ensure timely offboarding.

Google Drive / Dropbox / OneDrive (Cloud Storage Integrations)

Security Requirements:

• Use OAuth2 with minimal scopes (least privilege).
• Store refresh tokens encrypted and allow admin revocation.
• Validate file metadata and scan files when importing.

Risk Assessment: High - Integration exposes third-party data and tokens; compromised tokens can exfiltrate customer data.

Recommended Controls:

• Request incremental, minimal scopes (e.g., read-only when possible).
• Perform malware scanning and content re-hosting for untrusted content.
• Implement per-integration rate limits and monitor token usage anomalies.

Jira / Asana / Trello (Productivity Integrations)

Security Requirements:

• OAuth2 with minimal permission scopes; webhook secrets for inbound events.
• Verify webhook signatures and rate-limit inbound webhooks.

Risk Assessment: Medium - Scope-limited access reduces blast radius but webhook abuse or token compromise can propagate unwanted changes.

Recommended Controls:

• Enforce verification of webhook signatures and reject unsigned payloads.
• Store tokens encrypted, rotate periodically, and surface revocation to admins.
• Rate-limit integration operations and isolate background worker accounts.

Slack / Microsoft Teams (Communication Platforms)

Security Requirements:

• Use OAuth2 and verify message signatures for incoming events.
• Limit bot scopes and require admin consent flows for workspace-wide access.

Risk Assessment: Medium - Messaging integrations can leak sensitive notifications; bots can be abused if tokens compromised.

Recommended Controls:

• Restrict notification contents (redact PII).
• Use signed webhooks; validate timestamps to prevent replay.
• Provide org-level controls to disable or approve integrations and log all integration activity.

Email Providers (SMTP, Transactional Email e.g., SendGrid)

Security Requirements:

• Use API keys stored in KMS and TLS for SMTP; support DKIM/SPF/DMARC for sending domains.
• Template sanitization to avoid PII leakage.

Risk Assessment: Medium - Email is a common exfiltration vector and impersonation channel.

Recommended Controls:

• Enforce template review and escape untrusted content.
• Use domain verification and email sending limits; monitor bounces and abuse.
• Require API key rotation and restrict scope of keys where provider supports.

Push Notification Services (Apple Push, FCM)

Security Requirements:

• Use platform-specific credentials stored securely and rotate regularly.
• Minimize payload content (no PII in push messages).

Risk Assessment: Low to Medium - Push messages can reveal sensitive metadata if not redacted.

Recommended Controls:

• Redact sensitive content and use keyed tokens for each app instance.
• Audit push failures and unauthorized usage patterns.

Virus Scanning / AV Services

Security Requirements:

• All uploaded files scanned synchronously/asynchronously depending on policy.
• Quarantine and manual review workflows for suspected malware.

Risk Assessment: High - Failure can allow malware storage and distribution.

Recommended Controls:

• Integrate sandboxed scanning with multiple scanning engines for higher detection.
• Re-scan files on access and on signature updates; quarantine automatically and deny execution/preview for quarantined files.

Cloud Media/RTC SDKs / Conferencing Providers

Security Requirements:

• Media sessions use DTLS-SRTP or E2EE provided by vendor; secure token exchange for session credentials.
• Protect TURN/STUN credentials and rotate ephemeral session keys.

Risk Assessment: High - Media leaks may expose sensitive audio/video streams.

Recommended Controls:

• Require per-session ephemeral tokens with short TTLs.
• Validate vendor security posture and certificate handling; monitor for media token misuse.

Webhook/Inbound Events from Third Parties

Security Requirements:

• Signed payloads with timestamp and nonce; replay protection and signature verification.
• IP allowlist where feasible.

Risk Assessment: Medium - Unsigned or spoofable webhooks can cause unauthorized actions.

Recommended Controls:

• Validate signatures, reject old timestamps, and log inbound events for auditing.
• Throttle inbound events and require mutual authentication for critical flows.

Public API Consumers / Developer Apps

Security Requirements:

• OAuth2 client credentials with scopes; client secrets stored in KMS.
• Per-client rate limiting and scope enforcement.

Risk Assessment: High - Public APIs are attack surface for abuse and exfiltration.

Recommended Controls:

• Enforce per-client quotas, monitoring for anomalous patterns, and provide revocation endpoints.
• Require application registration and vetting for high-scope access; use mTLS for enterprise integrations.

---

Holistic Notes on Integration Security: - Always enforce least privilege across integration scopes. - Maintain an integrations inventory with SSO/SCIM, token age, and last-used timestamp. - Use a central integration management UI for admins to review and revoke tokens, and require enterprise-level controls (IP allowlisting, mTLS) for sensitive connectors.

---

How these elements work together (closing guidance) - Centralize identity and authorization: Edge & Auth provides a single-authentication and centralized policy enforcement point; the Application Services consult a single authorization service to perform complete mediation for every resource request. - Data-centric approach: Data classification drives encryption, retention and export rules enforced by Data Layer controls; application services are kept stateless where possible to reduce sensitive data exposure. - Realtime integrity and availability: Realtime Sync uses server-authoritative checkpoints and secure transport to preserve conflict resolution semantics while cryptographically signing owner-approved versions for tamper detection. - Defense-in-depth across layers: Frontend CSP and sanitization, gateway WAF and rate limits, microservices authorization and encrypted databacks all operate together to reduce the probability of successful attacks. - Operational readiness: Logging, SIEM, runbooks, backup tests, and incident response playbooks ensure that when issues occur, detection-to-remediation cycles are short, auditable, and trustworthy. - Tenant-aware security: Per-tenant keys, quotas, and RBAC reduce cross-tenant risks and allow compliance with regional residency and enterprise contractual obligations. - Secure developer workflows: Integrate security gates (SAST/DAST, dependency scanning, secret scanning) into CI/CD so production artifacts are hardened and reproducible.

Use the above principles, component controls, data protection and integration rules as the baseline security architecture for the collaborative whiteboarding platform. Adjust parameters (retention windows, crypto algorithms, key rotation frequencies) to match customer contractual requirements and applicable regulations (GDPR, CCPA, HIPAA where applicable).

---

10. Implementation Roadmap

This section provides a prioritized, phased approach for implementing the security controls identified throughout this analysis. The roadmap organizes security measures into logical phases based on risk, dependencies, and resource availability, ensuring critical security gaps are addressed first while building a foundation for comprehensive security coverage.

10.1. Prioritization Framework

Prioritization is critical for effective security implementation as it ensures that the most pressing vulnerabilities and regulatory requirements are addressed first, maximizing the protection of sensitive data and critical business functions. The prioritization framework combines various criteria to create a balanced implementation sequence:

Prioritization Criteria:

• Risk Level: Controls addressing critical and high-risk threats (identified through threat modeling) are prioritized first

• Compliance Deadlines: Regulatory requirements and compliance deadlines influence immediate priority

• Technical Complexity: Controls requiring foundational infrastructure are implemented early to enable subsequent controls

• Dependencies: Controls that other security measures depend upon are prioritized accordingly

• Resource Availability: Implementation considers the availability of skilled personnel, tools, and budget

• Business Impact: Controls protecting business-critical functions and data receive higher priority

These criteria work together to create a logical implementation sequence that balances security needs with practical constraints.

10.2. Phased Implementation Plan

Phase: IMMEDIATE

Timeline: 0-1 months

Rationale: This phase addresses the most critical vulnerabilities and compliance blockers that pose immediate risk to the platform’s integrity and data confidentiality.

Controls to Implement:

• Implement secure authentication protocols, including MFA, SSO, and OAuth with strong token validation

• Establish basic encryption for sensitive data both in transit and at rest

• Address critical XSS vulnerabilities through server-side input validation and output encoding

• Set foundational access controls to prevent unauthorized access to sensitive resources

• Ensure compliance with GDPR and CCPA through data protection measures and user consent mechanisms

Dependencies:

• None for initial implementation, foundational controls

Phase: SHORT-TERM

Timeline: 1-3 months

Rationale: These controls build upon immediate security measures, focusing on improving access control adjustments and ensuring that logging and API security mitigate identified threats effectively.

Controls to Implement:

• Enhance user authentication through comprehensive multi-factor authentication

• Deploy role-based access controls across the admin dashboard

• Implement comprehensive logging and monitoring for all administrative actions

• Strengthen API security with input validation and HTTPS protocols

• Begin encryption for all sensitive data at rest

Dependencies:

• Completion of MFA implementation

• Completion of initial access control measures

Phase: MEDIUM-TERM

Timeline: 3-6 months

Rationale: This phase focuses on refining security measures and addressing more complex threats, including third-party integrations and advanced data protection features.

Controls to Implement:

• Conduct third-party security audits and enhance controls on integrations

• Automate security testing and vulnerability scanning

• Implement advanced threat detection and response mechanisms

• Enhance data protection with encryption and DLP (Data Loss Prevention) strategies

Dependencies:

• Completion of access control enhancements

• Initial API security and logging infrastructure

Phase: LONG-TERM

Timeline: 6-12 months

Rationale: Focus on strategic initiatives that improve overall security posture and ensure continuous improvement and compliance.

Controls to Implement:

• Develop security maturity enhancements, including security awareness and training programs

• Implement advanced AI/ML security controls for anomaly detection

• Conduct comprehensive penetration testing and remediation

• Establish a robust incident response and management framework

Dependencies:

• Completion of medium-term security measures

Phase: ONGOING

Timeline: Continuous

Rationale: Continuous activities that maintain and improve security posture, address new threats, and ensure compliance.

Controls to Implement:

• Conduct regular security monitoring and incident response readiness

• Implement ongoing patch management and vulnerability assessments

• Ensure continuous compliance audits and reviews

• Maintain security logging and monitoring infrastructure

Dependencies:

• Initial implementation of logging and monitoring systems

• Established incident response framework

10.3. Resource Requirements

Skills: Security engineers, Security architects, Web developers, Compliance specialists

Recommended tools: SIEM solutions for logging and monitoring, Vulnerability scanners for testing, Encryption libraries for data protection, API management tools for secure interfaces

Estimated time effort: Approximately 3-6 months for initial phases, with ongoing efforts extending resources as per system complexity and requirements.

---

11. Verification and Testing Strategy

11.1. Testing Approach

Integrate security testing throughout the software development lifecycle (SDLC) with an emphasis on continuous security practices. Balance automated scanning with manual evaluations to prioritize high-risk areas based on business impact, adhering to shift-left security principles by incorporating security testing earlier and continuously. This approach ensures that vulnerabilities are identified and remediated as early as possible while maintaining compliance with relevant regulations and standards.

11.2. Testing Methods

Method	Frequency	Tools
STATIC APPLICATION SECURITY TESTING (SAST)	Every commit/build	SonarQube, Semgrep, Checkmarx, CodeQL
DYNAMIC APPLICATION SECURITY TESTING (DAST)	Nightly/weekly	OWASP ZAP, Burp Suite, Acunetix
DEPENDENCY SCANNING	Every build	Snyk, Dependabot, OWASP Dependency-Check
SECRETS SCANNING	Every commit	TruffleHog, GitLeaks, GitHub Secret Scanning
CONTAINER/INFRASTRUCTURE SCANNING	Every deployment	Trivy, Clair, Prowler, ScoutSuite
PENETRATION TESTING	Quarterly or before major releases	Custom scripts, Metasploit, Burp Suite Pro
SECURITY CODE REVIEW	For critical features	GitHub/GitLab code review, security checklists
COMPLIANCE SCANNING	Continuous	AWS Config, Azure Policy, Cloud Custodian

11.3. Compliance Verification

Multi-standard compliance (OWASP ASVS, NIST SP 800-53, ISO 27001) will be verified through automated tools and manual checks against regulatory requirements such as GDPR, CCPA, and PCI-DSS. Audit preparation will involve ensuring thorough documentation and evidence collection for external audits, including maintaining logs of compliance-related activities and decisions. Recommendations will include engaging third-party auditors for comprehensive evaluations to confirm adherence to all applicable regulations.

11.4. Continuous Monitoring

Implement Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) for real-time monitoring, supported by Intrusion Detection/Prevention Systems (IDS/IPS) to identify and mitigate threats. All logs will be aggregated and analyzed for anomalies, with integration into incident response processes to ensure prompt action against security events. Continuous monitoring will also include regular reviews of access controls, user activity, and system integrity to detect potential security incidents swiftly.

11.5. Key Performance Indicators (KPIs)

• Mean time to detect (MTTD) security issues
  
• Mean time to remediate (MTTR) vulnerabilities
  
• Percentage of critical vulnerabilities patched within SLA
  
• Security test coverage percentage
  
• False positive rate in automated scanning
  
• Compliance audit pass rate

---

12. Validation Report

This section presents a comprehensive validation of the security requirements generated throughout this analysis. The validation evaluates the requirements against five key dimensions: completeness, consistency, correctness, implementability, and alignment with business objectives. This assessment ensures that the security requirements are comprehensive, technically sound, and actionable for implementation teams.

12.1. Overall Assessment

The overall validation score reflects the quality and completeness of the security requirements across five critical dimensions. Each dimension is scored from 0.0 to 1.0, with 1.0 representing excellent coverage and 0.0 indicating significant gaps.

Overall Score: 0.88/1.0

Validation Status: ✅ PASSED

The security requirements have met the quality threshold (≥0.8) and are ready for implementation. The requirements demonstrate comprehensive coverage, technical accuracy, and alignment with business objectives.

The validation assesses:

• Completeness: Are all identified security concerns adequately addressed?
• Consistency: Do requirements align with each other without contradictions?
• Correctness: Are controls appropriate for the identified risks and correctly applied?
• Implementability: Are requirements specific, actionable, and feasible to implement?
• Alignment: Do security requirements align with business requirements and objectives?

12.2. Dimension Scores

Dimension	Score	Status
Completeness	0.78	⚠️
Consistency	0.95	✅
Correctness	0.90	✅
Implementability	0.85	✅
Alignment	0.90	✅

Score Interpretation: - ✅ 0.8-1.0: Excellent - ⚠️ 0.7-0.79: Acceptable (minor improvements needed) - ❌ <0.7: Needs significant improvement

12.3. Detailed Feedback

Implementability

and for enterprise/regulatory assurance.

If you want, I can: - Produce a prioritized remediation backlog (user stories + acceptance criteria) mapping each gap to concrete requirements and test cases. - Generate a one-page checklist for the development and security teams with specific default values and verification steps for immediate implementation.

---

Appendix A: Original Requirements Document

Collaborative Whiteboarding Application Requirements

We need to build an online collaborative whiteboarding platform for distributed teams to brainstorm, design, and plan projects visually in real time.

Key Features:

1. User Management
   - User registration and authentication (email, SSO, and OAuth with Google/Microsoft)
   - Team and workspace creation with granular access control (Owner, Admin, Member, Guest)
   - User profiles with role-based permissions and organization-level settings
   - Invitation system for adding collaborators to boards and teams

2. Board Management
   - Create, edit, duplicate, and delete boards
   - Organize boards within projects and teams
   - Manage sharing options (private, team-only, public link)
   - Version history and undo/redo capabilities
   - Board templates for different use cases (brainstorming, retrospectives, UX flows)

3. Real-Time Collaboration
   - Multiple users editing a board simultaneously
   - Live cursors showing collaborator presence
   - In-board chat and commenting functionality
   - @mentions and threaded discussions
   - Audio/video conferencing integration during collaboration sessions

4. Whiteboard Tools
   - Infinite canvas with pan and zoom support
   - Drawing tools: shapes, lines, connectors, sticky notes, text boxes
   - Grouping and alignment features for objects
   - Smart connectors for flow diagrams
   - Embedding external content (images, documents, videos, links)
   - Interactive widgets such as voting and timers

5. Integrations
   - Integration with productivity tools (Jira, Asana, Trello)
   - Cloud storage integrations (Google Drive, Dropbox, OneDrive)
   - Communication tools integration (Slack, Microsoft Teams)
   - API for custom integrations and automation

6. File Management
   - Upload and manage assets within boards
   - Support for common image and document formats (PNG, PDF, DOCX, etc.)
   - Export boards as images or PDFs
   - Version control for uploaded files and embedded objects

7. Access Control
   - Board access settings (view, comment, edit, ownership transfer)
   - Audit logs for user activity and changes

8. Notifications
   - In-app and email notifications for mentions, comments, and board changes
   - Optional integrations for notification channels (Slack, Teams)
   - Configurable notification preferences per user

9. Performance and Scalability
   - Low-latency real-time updates for large boards with many collaborators
   - Efficient synchronization and conflict resolution
   - Horizontal scaling to support enterprise-level organizations

10. Reporting and Analytics
    - Usage analytics per team or organization (active boards, users, sessions)
    - Export of activity logs and board metrics
    - Admin dashboards for license management

The application will be accessible via modern web browsers and native desktop/mobile clients. It will store user accounts, workspace data, board content, activity logs, and integration metadata in secure cloud infrastructure.

---

Appendix B: Glossary

Term	Definition
ASVS	Application Security Verification Standard (OWASP)
STRIDE	Spoofing, Tampering, Repudiation, Information Disclosure, Denial of Service, Elevation of Privilege
SAST	Static Application Security Testing
DAST	Dynamic Application Security Testing
MFA	Multi-Factor Authentication
RBAC	Role-Based Access Control
PII	Personally Identifiable Information
PHI	Protected Health Information
GDPR	General Data Protection Regulation
HIPAA	Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act
PCI-DSS	Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard

---

Appendix C: Complete Threat List

This appendix contains the complete list of all identified threats with full descriptions and mitigation strategies. Threats are organized by risk level for easy reference.

Critical Risk Threats

THR-004 - Frontend Layer (web/embedded content)

• Category: Information Disclosure
• Likelihood: High | Impact: High
• Risk Level: Critical
• Description: Cross-site scripting (XSS) via user-supplied text boxes, sticky notes, embedded links or comments leads to session theft, credential exposure, or data exfiltration for other users viewing the board.
• Mitigation Strategy: Strong output encoding/escaping on all rendered user content, enforce Content Security Policy (CSP), use well-sanitized rich text libraries, server-side input validation, and sanitize embedded HTML/iframes; treat embedded external content as untrusted with sandboxing.

THR-015 - Application Services (API layer)

• Category: Denial of Service
• Likelihood: High | Impact: High
• Risk Level: Critical
• Description: Abuse of API endpoints (mass board creation, large file uploads, repeated export requests) leads to resource exhaustion impacting availability.
• Mitigation Strategy: Implement per-tenant and per-user rate limits, quotas for uploads and exports, circuit breakers, async processing for heavy tasks with capacity controls, and monitoring/alerting for unusual spikes.

High Risk Threats

THR-001 - Edge & Auth (SSO/OAuth flows, Auth tokens)

• Category: Spoofing
• Likelihood: Medium | Impact: High
• Risk Level: High
• Description: An attacker forges or replays authentication tokens (JWT/OAuth tokens) or exploits weak SSO/OAuth configuration to impersonate a legitimate user and gain access to boards and organization resources.
• Mitigation Strategy: Enforce strong token validation (signature, issuer, audience), short token TTLs, token revocation/rotation, PKCE for OAuth flows, require MFA for high-privilege roles, monitor for anomalous token usage and reuse, enforce SAML/OIDC best practices including audience and recipient checks.

THR-003 - Application Services (Realtime Sync / CRDT/OT)

• Category: Repudiation
• Likelihood: Medium | Impact: High
• Risk Level: High
• Description: Users or attackers perform malicious edits (delete or alter board history) and later deny actions; without proper immutable logging, attribution is lost and actions cannot be proven.
• Mitigation Strategy: Write all operations to append-only audit/log store with tamper-evident techniques, include user ids and timestamps, maintain versioned board history, enable cryptographic signing of audit entries, and preserve backups for legal/forensics.

THR-005 - Application Services (Core API)

• Category: Tampering
• Likelihood: Medium | Impact: High
• Risk Level: High
• Description: API endpoints vulnerable to injection (SQL/NoSQL/command injection) allow attackers to modify database records, board content, or permissions.
• Mitigation Strategy: Use parameterized queries/ORMs, input validation and whitelisting, least-privilege DB accounts, prepared statements, WAF rules for injection patterns, regular code review and dependency scanning.

THR-006 - Frontend Layer & API (CSRF attack surface)

• Category: Tampering
• Likelihood: Medium | Impact: High
• Risk Level: High
• Description: Cross-Site Request Forgery causes authenticated users’ browsers to execute state-changing API calls (e.g., change sharing settings, invite users, transfer ownership) without their intent.
• Mitigation Strategy: Use anti-CSRF tokens for state-changing APIs or require same-site cookies and ensure APIs require Authorization headers (not relying solely on cookies), enforce double-submit, validate Origin/Referrer headers for sensitive operations.

THR-007 - Data Layer (object storage for assets)

• Category: Information Disclosure
• Likelihood: Medium | Impact: High
• Risk Level: High
• Description: Misconfigured object storage (public buckets, insecure signed URL expiry) exposes uploaded assets or board exports to unauthorized users or search engines.
• Mitigation Strategy: Enforce private-by-default storage policies, use short-lived signed URLs, bucket policies with least privilege, audit storage ACLs regularly, and implement malware scanning on upload.

THR-008 - External Services (third-party integrations)

• Category: Elevation of Privilege
• Likelihood: Medium | Impact: High
• Risk Level: High
• Description: Compromised third-party integration (e.g., Jira, Google Drive) or leaked integration tokens allow an attacker to access, modify, or exfiltrate organization data via integrations.
• Mitigation Strategy: Use least-privilege scopes for OAuth tokens, store integration credentials encrypted in KMS, provide tenant-scoped tokens, implement token rotation and revocation, allow admins to audit and revoke integrations, and implement backpressure for unusual integration activity.

THR-009 - Realtime Sync / Presence / PubSub

• Category: Denial of Service
• Likelihood: Medium | Impact: High
• Risk Level: High
• Description: An attacker floods the realtime sync channels with bogus operations or presence signals, causing high CPU/network usage, increased latencies or resource exhaustion affecting collaboration for many users.
• Mitigation Strategy: Apply rate limiting per connection/user, quota operations, validate operation sizes and shapes server-side, implement backpressure and sharding, use WAF/DDoS protection at edge, and monitor anomalous realtime traffic patterns.

THR-010 - Application Services (Media/AV processing)

• Category: Tampering
• Likelihood: Low | Impact: High
• Risk Level: High
• Description: Malicious media (audio/video) or crafted files cause remote code execution or memory corruption in media processing pipelines or third-party SDKs used for conferencing.
• Mitigation Strategy: Run media processing in isolated sandboxes/containers with strict resource limits, keep codecs and SDKs updated, perform input validation, use third-party CVE monitoring, and scan files for known exploit patterns before processing.

THR-012 - File Management (uploads)

• Category: Information Disclosure
• Likelihood: Medium | Impact: High
• Risk Level: High
• Description: Uploaded files contain sensitive data (PII, secrets) that are stored without encryption or leaked via export features, public links, or backups.
• Mitigation Strategy: Encrypt files at rest using KMS, enforce DLP/malware scanning on upload, prevent exporting of sensitive file types without admin consent, audit exports, and support tenant-level data residency controls.

THR-013 - Access Control (RBAC, ownership transfer)

• Category: Elevation of Privilege
• Likelihood: Medium | Impact: High
• Risk Level: High
• Description: Broken access control or logic flaws allow users to escalate privileges (e.g., Member -> Admin, transfer ownership, access private boards of other teams).
• Mitigation Strategy: Enforce server-side authorization checks on every operation (deny-by-default), implement fine-grained RBAC with ABAC where needed, adopt least privilege for roles, require multi-step verification for ownership transfers, and perform authorization testing (fuzzing & automated checks).

THR-014 - Frontend Layer & API (Insecure Direct Object References)

• Category: Information Disclosure
• Likelihood: Medium | Impact: High
• Risk Level: High
• Description: Predictable or sequential identifiers for boards/assets allow attackers to enumerate and access resources (insecure direct object references) via unauthenticated or insufficiently authorized requests.
• Mitigation Strategy: Use non-guessable IDs (UUIDs, random tokens), enforce per-request authorization checks, signed URLs for assets, and audit access patterns to detect enumeration attempts.

THR-016 - External Services (SSO/Identity Providers)

• Category: Information Disclosure
• Likelihood: Low | Impact: High
• Risk Level: High
• Description: Compromise or misconfiguration of an external IdP (or compromised enterprise IdP account) leads to disclosure or unauthorized access across multiple tenants via SSO.
• Mitigation Strategy: Support federation guards (restrict IdPs per tenant), require proof of domain ownership for enterprise SSO, enable SCIM provisioning auditing, and provide admin controls to unlink compromised IdPs and force re-authentication.

THR-017 - Frontend Layer (Embedded external content)

• Category: Information Disclosure
• Likelihood: High | Impact: Medium
• Risk Level: High
• Description: Embedded content (iframes, links) from external sites can leak user data or metadata (referrer, cookies) to third-party sites or enable clickjacking.
• Mitigation Strategy: Sandbox embedded iframes, strip/refine referrer headers, use rel=‘noopener’ for links, require user confirmation before embedding external content, and render previews server-side to neutralize active content.

THR-018 - Application Services (Integrations & OAuth tokens storage)

• Category: Information Disclosure
• Likelihood: Medium | Impact: High
• Risk Level: High
• Description: Stored integration tokens (Jira/Slack/Drive) are exfiltrated from databases or logs, allowing attackers to access external services and data.
• Mitigation Strategy: Encrypt integration tokens with KMS, avoid logging secrets, rotate tokens periodically, implement strict DB access controls and monitoring, and provide least-privilege scopes for integrations.

THR-019 - Data Layer (relational/document DBs)

• Category: Tampering
• Likelihood: Low | Impact: High
• Risk Level: High
• Description: An attacker or compromised process modifies board version history, RBAC metadata, or audit logs in the primary databases to cover tracks or change permissions.
• Mitigation Strategy: Use database-level auditing, append-only audit store for critical events, restrict DB admin operations to a few privileged roles, use immutable backups and multi-region replication, and monitor for unauthorized schema/data changes.

THR-021 - Application Services (API layer)

• Category: Spoofing
• Likelihood: Medium | Impact: High
• Risk Level: High
• Description: API clients use stolen API keys or reused tokens to impersonate service clients (server-to-server integrations) and perform unauthorized API calls.
• Mitigation Strategy: Issue scoped API keys with least privilege and rotation, require mutual TLS for server-to-server integrations, implement granular permissions and allow admins to revoke keys, implement usage monitoring and anomaly detection.

THR-023 - Data Layer (audit/log store)

• Category: Tampering
• Likelihood: Low | Impact: High
• Risk Level: High
• Description: Admin or attacker with elevated privileges alters or deletes audit logs to erase evidence of malicious activity.
• Mitigation Strategy: Use append-only tamper-evident log stores, replicate logs to separate write-only storage/region, use cryptographic signing, and restrict access to logs to a limited set of roles with out-of-band alerting on log modifications.

THR-024 - External Services (cloud storage integrations)

• Category: Information Disclosure
• Likelihood: Medium | Impact: High
• Risk Level: High
• Description: Integration with third-party cloud storage results in unintentional sharing of organization documents (e.g., Drive link made public), leaking sensitive business information.
• Mitigation Strategy: Request minimal scopes, allow admins to restrict which cloud providers or scopes are allowed, surface link-sharing risks to users, and scan metadata for public/shared flags and alert admins.

THR-026 - Frontend Layer & Chat/Commenting

• Category: Information Disclosure
• Likelihood: High | Impact: Medium
• Risk Level: High
• Description: @mentions, threaded comments or chat may be used to spam or leak data (e.g., mention external email to exfiltrate content), or to phish other users via malicious links in chat.
• Mitigation Strategy: Rate limit mentions/messages, sanitize and rewrite links (e.g., safe redirector), warn/scan for suspicious links, allow users to block/unsubscribe, and provide link previews that verify destination safety.

THR-028 - Integrations/API (SSRF via file import or URL fetch)

• Category: Tampering
• Likelihood: Medium | Impact: High
• Risk Level: High
• Description: Attackers supply URLs or files causing the backend to fetch internal metadata or access internal resources (SSRF), enabling discovery of internal services or exfiltration.
• Mitigation Strategy: Validate and restrict outbound fetch domains, use allowlists, perform server-side URL parsing and block private IP ranges, fetch via isolated proxies with egress controls, and scan file contents rather than fetching remote content when possible.

THR-029 - Frontend Layer & Invitation System

• Category: Spoofing
• Likelihood: High | Impact: Medium
• Risk Level: High
• Description: Invitation system is abused to send phishing invites or an attacker forges invitation emails to trick users into visiting malicious links or handing over credentials.
• Mitigation Strategy: Sign outbound emails with DMARC/DKIM/SPF, include clear app branding and context-aware invite pages, require recipients to authenticate via provider (SSO) and show inviter identity, and rate limit invite sending; provide admin-level controls for external invites.

THR-030 - Supply Chain (third-party SDKs used in frontend/backends)

• Category: Elevation of Privilege
• Likelihood: Medium | Impact: High
• Risk Level: High
• Description: Compromised or malicious third-party libraries (npm packages, SDKs) introduce backdoors or escalations allowing attackers to run arbitrary code or access secrets.
• Mitigation Strategy: Pin dependency versions, use SCA tooling (software composition analysis), prefer vetted/enterprise packages, apply runtime restrictions (CSP, subresource integrity for web), scan for malicious packages, and perform periodic dependency audits.

Medium Risk Threats

THR-002 - Frontend Layer (web clients)

• Category: Tampering
• Likelihood: Medium | Impact: Medium
• Risk Level: Medium
• Description: Client-side JavaScript or local cached board deltas are tampered with (local modification of deltas or replay) to inject malicious deltas or corrupt board content that then syncs to other users.
• Mitigation Strategy: Sign/validate deltas on the server side (operation-level HMAC or signatures), implement server-side authoritative validation of operations, limit client trust, use secure local storage mechanisms, and include operation sequencing / nonce checks.

THR-011 - Notifications & Integrations (webhooks)

• Category: Spoofing
• Likelihood: Medium | Impact: Medium
• Risk Level: Medium
• Description: An attacker spoofs webhook events or forges callbacks (from Slack/Jira/etc.) to trigger unauthorized actions or inject content into boards and activity streams.
• Mitigation Strategy: Validate webhook signatures (HMAC), use mutual TLS where possible, verify sender IP ranges or tokens, and implement replay protection and strict parsing of incoming webhook payloads.

THR-020 - Frontend Layer & API (Clickjacking / UI redress)

• Category: Tampering
• Likelihood: Medium | Impact: Medium
• Risk Level: Medium
• Description: An attacker frames the application or uses hidden UI overlays to trick users into performing sensitive actions (e.g., changing access, exporting data).
• Mitigation Strategy: Use X-Frame-Options or CSP frame-ancestors headers, require re-authentication (or confirm dialogues) for sensitive operations, and implement UI anti-automation checks for critical flows.

THR-022 - Frontend Layer (client-side plugins/widgets)

• Category: Information Disclosure
• Likelihood: Medium | Impact: Medium
• Risk Level: Medium
• Description: Client-side telemetry or local caches accidentally include sensitive board content or PII and are leaked via browser-sync or telemetry endpoints.
• Mitigation Strategy: Minimize telemetry collection (opt-in), anonymize/aggregate telemetry, encrypt local caches and scope cached content, and provide clear retention policies and controls for local data.

THR-025 - Application Services (export/PDF/image generation)

• Category: Information Disclosure
• Likelihood: Medium | Impact: Medium
• Risk Level: Medium
• Description: Board exports (PDF/PNG) are generated with embedded metadata (emails, internal URLs) that leak internal information when shared externally.
• Mitigation Strategy: Scrub sensitive metadata from exports, allow admins to disable exports, present clear warnings when sharing exports publicly, and maintain audit logs of exports per user/board.

THR-027 - Performance & Scalability (CDN, Realtime gateway)

• Category: Denial of Service
• Likelihood: Medium | Impact: Medium
• Risk Level: Medium
• Description: Large boards with many objects or many simultaneous collaborators lead to performance degradation; an attacker may intentionally craft large documents to cause high memory/cpu on rendering and sync.
• Mitigation Strategy: Enforce size limits per board/object, paginate or chunk operations, lazy-load canvas regions, use CDN caching for static assets, and autoscale realtime services with admission control for overloaded tenants.

Total Threats: 30

---

Appendix D: Complete Requirements Traceability Matrix

This appendix provides complete end-to-end traceability from requirements through threats to controls and verification.

Full Traceability Table

Req ID	Requirement	Category	Sensitivity	Threat IDs	Security Controls	Priority	Verification	Status
REQ-001	User registration and authentication supporting em…	Authentication	High	THR-001, THR-002, THR-003 +7	[OWASP] V2.1, [NIST] IA-2, [ISO27001] A.9.4.2	Critical	Review identity management design, test MFA enforcement, and audit federated authentication configurations and logs., Review implementation against OWASP checklist, inspect password storage, test SSO flows (SAML/OIDC), and verify MFA enrolment and challenge behaviour in functional tests.	Pending
REQ-002	Team and workspace creation and management, with r…	User Management	High	THR-005, THR-007, THR-012 +4	[OWASP] V4.1, [NIST] AC-2, [NIST] AC-6	Critical	Review account management procedures, test provisioning/deprovisioning, and inspect audit logs for role change events., Role matrix review, unit/integration tests for authorization checks, and penetration tests to attempt privilege escalation.	Pending
REQ-003	User profiles with editable attributes and organiz…	User Management	Medium	THR-001, THR-002, THR-003 +7	[OWASP] V2.8, [NIST] AC-2 (3), [ISO27001] A.9.2.3	High	Functional tests for profile update endpoints, data-protection reviews, and privacy settings verification., Policy and procedural review, evidence of change reviews, and sample audits of profile modifications.	Pending
REQ-004	Invitation system to invite users to teams and boa…	User Management	High	THR-001, THR-002, THR-003 +7	[OWASP] V2.6, [NIST] AC-2 (6), [ISO27001] A.7.1.2	High	Process documentation review and sample onboarding/offboarding records., Test invite token lifecycle, inspect invite link generation and expiry, and attempt token replay attacks in QA.	Pending
REQ-005	Create, edit, duplicate, and delete boards with re…	Board Management	High	THR-001, THR-003, THR-009 +7	[OWASP] V4.3, [NIST] AC-3, [ISO27001] A.8.1.3	Critical	Authorization unit tests, access control matrix validation, and privilege escalation pentesting., Asset inventory review and lifecycle policy conformance checks.	Pending
REQ-006	Organize boards within projects and teams and prov…	Data Management	Medium	THR-001, THR-007, THR-011 +4	None	Medium	Manual Review	Pending
REQ-007	Manage sharing options per board: private, team-on…	Access Control	High	THR-004, THR-005, THR-006 +7	[OWASP] V4.5, [NIST] AC-19, [NIST] SC-12	Critical	Cryptography configuration review and TLS/URL signing tests., Functional testing of sharing revocation, audit log checks, and URL/token strength review.	Pending
REQ-008	Version history, undo/redo capabilities and abilit…	Data Management	High	THR-001, THR-002, THR-003 +7	[OWASP] V10.1, [NIST] SI-12, [NIST] CP-9	Critical	Backup logs, restoration tests, and integrity verification of restored versions., Integrity monitoring logs review and rollback exercise results.	Pending
REQ-009	Board templates library for common workflows (brai…	User Experience	Low	THR-001, THR-002, THR-003 +7	[OWASP] V8.2, [NIST] CM-2, [NIST] SA-9	Medium	Change logs for template updates and CM system audits., Supplier/component review evidence and template vetting records.	Pending
REQ-010	Real-time collaboration with multiple users editin…	Collaboration	High	THR-002, THR-003, THR-004 +7	[OWASP] V10.4, [NIST] SC-13, [ISO27001] A.14.2.5	Critical	Secure design artifacts, threat models, and review of implementation against design., Protocol review, concurrency and conflict-resolution tests, and tamper-resistance checks.	Pending
REQ-011	Presence indicators and live cursors with configur…	Collaboration	Medium	THR-006, THR-008, THR-009 +4	[OWASP] V10.6, [NIST] AC-20, [ISO27001] A.18.1.4	High	Policy enforcement tests and audit logs of presence accesses., Privacy impact assessment and legal/compliance review.	Pending
REQ-012	In-board chat, commenting, threaded discussions, a…	Communication	Medium	THR-011, THR-026	[OWASP] V6.3, [NIST] SC-8, [NIST] SI-10	Critical	Automated scanning for XSS, code review of sanitization functions, and fuzzing of message inputs., Sanitization unit tests and monitoring logs for detected malicious inputs.	Pending
REQ-013	Audio/video conferencing integration (via third-pa…	Collaboration	High	THR-001, THR-004, THR-007 +7	[OWASP] V10.7, [NIST] SC-17, [ISO27001] A.9.2.6	High	Certificate validation checks and review of crypto usage for media channels., Policy documentation, recorded session access logs, and checks for recording consent.	Pending
REQ-014	Infinite canvas with smooth pan/zoom and high-perf…	User Experience	Low	THR-015, THR-016, THR-027 +1	[OWASP] V14.1, [NIST] SC-5, [ISO27001] A.12.1.3	Critical	Capacity plan review and monitoring dashboards during load testing., Load testing, resource-quota tests, and DoS simulation against canvas APIs.	Pending
REQ-015	Drawing and layout tools: shapes, lines, connector…	Whiteboard Tools	Low	THR-004, THR-013	[OWASP] V6.1, [NIST] SI-10, [ISO27001] A.14.2.5	High	Fuzzing of shape inputs, SVG sanitizer tests, and code review for rendering pipeline., Validation test cases and library dependency management audits.	Pending
REQ-016	Embedding external content (images, documents, vid…	File Management	High	THR-002, THR-004, THR-005 +7	[OWASP] V6.5, [NIST] SA-12, [NIST] SC-7	Critical	Third-party risk assessments and contractual evidence of security requirements., CSP and sandbox tests, iframe attribute checks, and pentest attempts to escape sandbox.	Pending
REQ-017	Interactive widgets (voting, timers) that run clie…	User Experience	Medium	THR-002, THR-004, THR-005 +7	[OWASP] V6.5, [NIST] SA-12, [NIST] SC-7	Critical	Third-party risk assessments and contractual evidence of security requirements., CSP and sandbox tests, iframe attribute checks, and pentest attempts to escape sandbox.	Pending
REQ-018	File upload and asset management with support for …	File Management	High	THR-007, THR-010, THR-012 +5	[OWASP] V6.6, [NIST] SI-3, [NIST] SC-28	Critical	Storage encryption configuration review and ACL policy tests., Malware detection logs and testing with known-malicious samples in safe environment.	Pending
REQ-019	Export boards as raster images or PDFs with permis…	Data Management	High	THR-001, THR-005, THR-007 +7	[OWASP] V10.2, [NIST] MP-6, [NIST] SI-12 (1)	High	Attempt unauthorized exports, review export logs, and confirm watermarking/redaction applies when configured., Monitoring rules tests and simulated bulk-export detection exercises.	Pending
REQ-020	Integrations with productivity tools (Jira, Asana,…	Integrations	High	THR-001, THR-007, THR-008 +7	[OWASP] V9.1, [NIST] SA-9, [ISO27001] A.15.1.1	Critical	OAuth scope audits, token storage review, and revocation workflow tests., Supplier assessment records and contractual evidence.	Pending
REQ-021	Public API for custom integrations and automation …	Integrations	High	THR-001, THR-007, THR-008 +7	[OWASP] V9.2, [NIST] IA-5, [NIST] SC-23	Critical	API token lifecycle tests, revocation checks, and penetration tests on API auth endpoints., Session/token tests and review of revocation workflow.	Pending
REQ-022	Fine-grained board access controls: view, comment,…	Access Control	High	THR-001, THR-002, THR-003 +7	[OWASP] V4.6, [NIST] AC-5, [NIST] AU-6	Critical	Ownership transfer tests, ACL enforcement tests, and audit log inspection for transfer events., Review delegation workflows and test separation of duties constraints.	Pending
REQ-023	Audit logging for authentication events, permissio…	Security/Compliance	High	THR-001, THR-002, THR-003 +7	[OWASP] V11.1, [NIST] AU-2, [NIST] AU-9	Critical	Log sampling and tamper tests, SIEM configuration review, and retention checks., Event coverage reviews and checking logs for required fields.	Pending
REQ-024	Configurable notifications (in-app, email) for men…	Notifications	Low	THR-001, THR-002, THR-003 +7	[OWASP] V10.9, [NIST] PL-4, [ISO27001] A.18.1.3	High	Review notification templates for PII, test opt-in/opt-out flows, and inspect webhook signing., Policy existence check and sample notification content review.	Pending
REQ-025	Performance and scalability requirements: horizont…	Performance & Scalability	Medium	THR-009, THR-015, THR-027	[OWASP] V10.4, [NIST] SC-13, [ISO27001] A.14.2.5	Critical	Secure design artifacts, threat models, and review of implementation against design., Protocol review, concurrency and conflict-resolution tests, and tamper-resistance checks.	Pending
REQ-026	Reporting and analytics: per-team and per-organiza…	Analytics & Administration	Medium	THR-001, THR-002, THR-003 +7	[OWASP] V2.8, [NIST] AC-2 (3), [ISO27001] A.9.2.3	High	Functional tests for profile update endpoints, data-protection reviews, and privacy settings verification., Policy and procedural review, evidence of change reviews, and sample audits of profile modifications.	Pending
REQ-027	Operational controls: encrypted storage (at-rest a…	Operations & Security	High	THR-007, THR-008, THR-012 +6	[OWASP] V14.5, [NIST] CP-9, [NIST] SC-5 +1	Critical	Restore drills, monitoring configuration review, rate-limit effectiveness testing, and DDoS response exercises., Backup/restore test records and integrity checks.	Pending
REQ-028	Privacy and data residency controls: per-organizat…	Security/Compliance	High	THR-004, THR-005, THR-007 +7	None	Medium	Manual Review	Pending
REQ-029	Client software distribution model for web, deskto…	Client Platforms	Medium	THR-002, THR-007, THR-010 +5	None	Medium	Manual Review	Pending
REQ-030	Content moderation and compliance tooling: ability…	Governance	Medium	THR-001, THR-002, THR-004 +7	None	Medium	Manual Review	Pending

Total Requirements Tracked: 30

Detailed Requirement Mappings

The following section provides detailed traceability for each requirement:

REQ-001: User registration and authentication supporting email/password, SSO (SAML/OIDC), OAuth with Google/M…

Related Threats:

• THR-001: An attacker forges or replays authentication tokens (JWT/OAuth tokens) or exploi…
• THR-002: Client-side JavaScript or local cached board deltas are tampered with (local mod…
• THR-003: Users or attackers perform malicious edits (delete or alter board history) and l…
• THR-004: Cross-site scripting (XSS) via user-supplied text boxes, sticky notes, embedded …
• THR-006: Cross-Site Request Forgery causes authenticated users’ browsers to execute state…
• …and 5 more threats

Security Controls:

• [OWASP] V2.1: [OWASP] Verify that authentication controls (including password, SSO, and multi-factor a…
• [NIST] IA-2: [NIST] Devices and users shall be uniquely identified and authenticated. Supports multi…
• [ISO27001] A.9.4.2: [ISO27001] Use of privileged and non-privileged authentication methods including secure imp…

Verification: Review identity management design, test MFA enforcement, and audit federated authentication configurations and logs., Review implementation against OWASP checklist, inspect password storage, test SSO flows (SAML/OIDC), and verify MFA enrolment and challenge behaviour in functional tests., Policy review, configuration inspection, and evidence of enforced authentication methods across systems.

Priority: Critical | Status: Pending

---

REQ-002: Team and workspace creation and management, with role-based permissions (Owner, Admin, Member, Guest…

Related Threats:

• THR-005: API endpoints vulnerable to injection (SQL/NoSQL/command injection) allow attack…
• THR-007: Misconfigured object storage (public buckets, insecure signed URL expiry) expose…
• THR-012: Uploaded files contain sensitive data (PII, secrets) that are stored without enc…
• THR-013: Broken access control or logic flaws allow users to escalate privileges (e.g., M…
• THR-015: Abuse of API endpoints (mass board creation, large file uploads, repeated export…
• …and 2 more threats

Security Controls:

• [OWASP] V4.1: [OWASP] Verify that role-based access control is implemented correctly. Ensure separatio…
• [NIST] AC-2: [NIST] Account management: The organization manages information system accounts, includ…
• [NIST] AC-6: [NIST] Least privilege: The organization limits users’ access to the minimum necessary …

Verification: Review account management procedures, test provisioning/deprovisioning, and inspect audit logs for role change events., Role matrix review, unit/integration tests for authorization checks, and penetration tests to attempt privilege escalation., Permission audits, role-based access tests, and reviews of unneeded privileges.

Priority: Critical | Status: Pending

---

REQ-003: User profiles with editable attributes and organization-level settings for privacy and sharing defau…

Related Threats:

• THR-001: An attacker forges or replays authentication tokens (JWT/OAuth tokens) or exploi…
• THR-002: Client-side JavaScript or local cached board deltas are tampered with (local mod…
• THR-003: Users or attackers perform malicious edits (delete or alter board history) and l…
• THR-004: Cross-site scripting (XSS) via user-supplied text boxes, sticky notes, embedded …
• THR-006: Cross-Site Request Forgery causes authenticated users’ browsers to execute state…
• …and 5 more threats

Security Controls:

• [OWASP] V2.8: [OWASP] Verify secure handling of user profile and account settings. Ensure personal dat…
• [NIST] AC-2 (3): [NIST] The organization supports management of account attributes, including user profi…
• [ISO27001] A.9.2.3: [ISO27001] Management of privileged access rights and user profiles to ensure that changes …

Verification: Functional tests for profile update endpoints, data-protection reviews, and privacy settings verification., Policy and procedural review, evidence of change reviews, and sample audits of profile modifications., Audit change logs, test that unauthorized profile edits are blocked, and policy conformance checks.

Priority: High | Status: Pending

---

REQ-004: Invitation system to invite users to teams and boards via email with link expiration, revocation, an…

Related Threats:

• THR-001: An attacker forges or replays authentication tokens (JWT/OAuth tokens) or exploi…
• THR-002: Client-side JavaScript or local cached board deltas are tampered with (local mod…
• THR-003: Users or attackers perform malicious edits (delete or alter board history) and l…
• THR-004: Cross-site scripting (XSS) via user-supplied text boxes, sticky notes, embedded …
• THR-006: Cross-Site Request Forgery causes authenticated users’ browsers to execute state…
• …and 5 more threats

Security Controls:

• [OWASP] V2.6: [OWASP] Verify account provisioning and deprovisioning workflows, including secure invit…
• [NIST] AC-2 (6): [NIST] The organization controls the automated establishment, activation, modification,…
• [ISO27001] A.7.1.2: [ISO27001] Roles and responsibilities for user provisioning and deprovisioning including on…

Verification: Process documentation review and sample onboarding/offboarding records., Test invite token lifecycle, inspect invite link generation and expiry, and attempt token replay attacks in QA., Review provisioning logs, test automated disablement, and validate workflow completeness.

Priority: High | Status: Pending

---

REQ-005: Create, edit, duplicate, and delete boards with resource lifecycle management and soft-delete/retent…

Related Threats:

• THR-001: An attacker forges or replays authentication tokens (JWT/OAuth tokens) or exploi…
• THR-003: Users or attackers perform malicious edits (delete or alter board history) and l…
• THR-009: An attacker floods the realtime sync channels with bogus operations or presence …
• THR-011: An attacker spoofs webhook events or forges callbacks (from Slack/Jira/etc.) to …
• THR-012: Uploaded files contain sensitive data (PII, secrets) that are stored without enc…
• …and 5 more threats

Security Controls:

• [OWASP] V4.3: [OWASP] Verify that object level access controls are enforced for create, read, update, …
• [NIST] AC-3: [NIST] Access enforcement: The information system enforces assigned authorizations for …
• [ISO27001] A.8.1.3: [ISO27001] Assets (including data and resources) shall be managed throughout their lifecycl…

Verification: Authorization unit tests, access control matrix validation, and privilege escalation pentesting., Asset inventory review and lifecycle policy conformance checks., Policy-to-enforcement mapping review and tests to confirm unauthorized actions are blocked.

Priority: Critical | Status: Pending

---

REQ-006: Organize boards within projects and teams and provide search and tagging for discoverability.

Related Threats:

• THR-001: An attacker forges or replays authentication tokens (JWT/OAuth tokens) or exploi…
• THR-007: Misconfigured object storage (public buckets, insecure signed URL expiry) expose…
• THR-011: An attacker spoofs webhook events or forges callbacks (from Slack/Jira/etc.) to …
• THR-013: Broken access control or logic flaws allow users to escalate privileges (e.g., M…
• THR-014: Predictable or sequential identifiers for boards/assets allow attackers to enume…
• …and 2 more threats

Verification: Manual Review

Priority: Medium | Status: Pending

---

REQ-007: Manage sharing options per board: private, team-only, or public link. Public links should support co…

Related Threats:

• THR-004: Cross-site scripting (XSS) via user-supplied text boxes, sticky notes, embedded …
• THR-005: API endpoints vulnerable to injection (SQL/NoSQL/command injection) allow attack…
• THR-006: Cross-Site Request Forgery causes authenticated users’ browsers to execute state…
• THR-007: Misconfigured object storage (public buckets, insecure signed URL expiry) expose…
• THR-012: Uploaded files contain sensitive data (PII, secrets) that are stored without enc…
• …and 5 more threats

Security Controls:

• [OWASP] V4.5: [OWASP] Verify access control models for sharing resources, including link-based sharing…
• [NIST] AC-19: [NIST] Access control for mobile devices and collaboration tools including capabilities…
• [NIST] SC-12: [NIST] Cryptographic protection of data during sharing and transmission to prevent unau…

Verification: Cryptography configuration review and TLS/URL signing tests., Functional testing of sharing revocation, audit log checks, and URL/token strength review., Token entropy testing, permission matrix tests, and revoke-and-test flows for links.

Priority: Critical | Status: Pending

---

REQ-008: Version history, undo/redo capabilities and ability to view and restore historical board states with…

Related Threats:

• THR-001: An attacker forges or replays authentication tokens (JWT/OAuth tokens) or exploi…
• THR-002: Client-side JavaScript or local cached board deltas are tampered with (local mod…
• THR-003: Users or attackers perform malicious edits (delete or alter board history) and l…
• THR-004: Cross-site scripting (XSS) via user-supplied text boxes, sticky notes, embedded …
• THR-005: API endpoints vulnerable to injection (SQL/NoSQL/command injection) allow attack…
• …and 5 more threats

Security Controls:

• [OWASP] V10.1: [OWASP] Verify that data versioning and history functions maintain integrity and are pro…
• [NIST] SI-12: [NIST] Information system monitoring for integrity and unauthorized modification; maint…
• [NIST] CP-9: [NIST] Information system backup: Ensure backup and restoration processes that preserve…

Verification: Backup logs, restoration tests, and integrity verification of restored versions., Integrity monitoring logs review and rollback exercise results., Integrity checks of version store, restore operation tests, and tamper attempts in controlled tests.

Priority: Critical | Status: Pending

---

REQ-009: Board templates library for common workflows (brainstorming, retrospectives, UX flows) and ability f…

Related Threats:

• THR-001: An attacker forges or replays authentication tokens (JWT/OAuth tokens) or exploi…
• THR-002: Client-side JavaScript or local cached board deltas are tampered with (local mod…
• THR-003: Users or attackers perform malicious edits (delete or alter board history) and l…
• THR-004: Cross-site scripting (XSS) via user-supplied text boxes, sticky notes, embedded …
• THR-005: API endpoints vulnerable to injection (SQL/NoSQL/command injection) allow attack…
• …and 5 more threats

Security Controls:

• [OWASP] V8.2: [OWASP] Verify secure handling of templates and reusable assets. Ensure templates don’t …
• [NIST] CM-2: [NIST] Baseline configurations and managed configuration change for templates or reusab…
• [NIST] SA-9: [NIST] External component usage and secure configuration of acquired components and tem…

Verification: Change logs for template updates and CM system audits., Supplier/component review evidence and template vetting records., Template content scans, secrets detection tests, and permission checks on template library.

Priority: Medium | Status: Pending

---

REQ-010: Real-time collaboration with multiple users editing simultaneously, efficient synchronization (e.g.,…

Related Threats:

• THR-002: Client-side JavaScript or local cached board deltas are tampered with (local mod…
• THR-003: Users or attackers perform malicious edits (delete or alter board history) and l…
• THR-004: Cross-site scripting (XSS) via user-supplied text boxes, sticky notes, embedded …
• THR-006: Cross-Site Request Forgery causes authenticated users’ browsers to execute state…
• THR-007: Misconfigured object storage (public buckets, insecure signed URL expiry) expose…
• …and 5 more threats

Security Controls:

• [OWASP] V10.4: [OWASP] Verify secure synchronization protocols for real-time collaboration. Ensure conf…
• [NIST] SC-13: [NIST] Use cryptographic mechanisms to protect the confidentiality and integrity of rea…
• [ISO27001] A.14.2.5: [ISO27001] Ensure security in development of real-time systems including design for synchro…

Verification: Secure design artifacts, threat models, and review of implementation against design., Protocol review, concurrency and conflict-resolution tests, and tamper-resistance checks., Network capture inspection for TLS use and message integrity test vectors.

Priority: Critical | Status: Pending

---

REQ-011: Presence indicators and live cursors with configurable privacy controls (e.g., anonymize presence or…

Related Threats:

• THR-006: Cross-Site Request Forgery causes authenticated users’ browsers to execute state…
• THR-008: Compromised third-party integration (e.g., Jira, Google Drive) or leaked integra…
• THR-009: An attacker floods the realtime sync channels with bogus operations or presence …
• THR-013: Broken access control or logic flaws allow users to escalate privileges (e.g., M…
• THR-020: An attacker frames the application or uses hidden UI overlays to trick users int…
• …and 2 more threats

Security Controls:

• [OWASP] V10.6: [OWASP] Verify that presence information and live cursors do not expose unintended PII a…
• [NIST] AC-20: [NIST] Information sharing and collaborative capabilities must be controlled and restri…
• [ISO27001] A.18.1.4: [ISO27001] Privacy and protection of personally identifiable information shall be ensured w…

Verification: Policy enforcement tests and audit logs of presence accesses., Privacy impact assessment and legal/compliance review., Privacy tests, access control checks for presence streams, and PII scanning of presence data.

Priority: High | Status: Pending

---

REQ-012: In-board chat, commenting, threaded discussions, and @mentions with notification triggers and opt-ou…

Related Threats:

• THR-011: An attacker spoofs webhook events or forges callbacks (from Slack/Jira/etc.) to …
• THR-026: @mentions, threaded comments or chat may be used to spam or leak data (e.g., men…

Security Controls:

• [OWASP] V6.3: [OWASP] Verify that user-generated content (chat, comments, mentions) is properly valida…
• [NIST] SC-8: [NIST] Protection of information at endpoints and during communication (including messa…
• [NIST] SI-10: [NIST] Information input validation and sanitization, including for messaging systems a…

Verification: Automated scanning for XSS, code review of sanitization functions, and fuzzing of message inputs., Sanitization unit tests and monitoring logs for detected malicious inputs., Transport security tests, endpoint configuration reviews, and abuse/rate-limit testing.

Priority: Critical | Status: Pending

---

REQ-013: Audio/video conferencing integration (via third-party SDKs or built-in) with secure media handling, …

Related Threats:

• THR-001: An attacker forges or replays authentication tokens (JWT/OAuth tokens) or exploi…
• THR-004: Cross-site scripting (XSS) via user-supplied text boxes, sticky notes, embedded …
• THR-007: Misconfigured object storage (public buckets, insecure signed URL expiry) expose…
• THR-008: Compromised third-party integration (e.g., Jira, Google Drive) or leaked integra…
• THR-010: Malicious media (audio/video) or crafted files cause remote code execution or me…
• …and 5 more threats

Security Controls:

• [OWASP] V10.7: [OWASP] Verify that audio/video integrations use secure transport, appropriate encryptio…
• [NIST] SC-17: [NIST] Public key infrastructure and secure channels for protecting multimedia sessions…
• [ISO27001] A.9.2.6: [ISO27001] Control and monitor use of audio-visual equipment to prevent unauthorized record…

Verification: Certificate validation checks and review of crypto usage for media channels., Policy documentation, recorded session access logs, and checks for recording consent., Media session capture to confirm encryption, permissions workflow tests, and credential/token leakage checks.

Priority: High | Status: Pending

---

REQ-014: Infinite canvas with smooth pan/zoom and high-performance rendering across devices, including progre…

Related Threats:

• THR-015: Abuse of API endpoints (mass board creation, large file uploads, repeated export…
• THR-016: Compromise or misconfiguration of an external IdP (or compromised enterprise IdP…
• THR-027: Large boards with many objects or many simultaneous collaborators lead to perfor…
• THR-028: Attackers supply URLs or files causing the backend to fetch internal metadata or…

Security Controls:

• [OWASP] V14.1: [OWASP] Verify that applications handle large resources and rendering efficiently and pr…
• [NIST] SC-5: [NIST] Denial of service protection and resource management controls to mitigate resour…
• [ISO27001] A.12.1.3: [ISO27001] Capacity management to ensure systems can handle expected loads and scale to mit…

Verification: Capacity plan review and monitoring dashboards during load testing., Load testing, resource-quota tests, and DoS simulation against canvas APIs., Rate limit tests, autoscaling behavior checks, and simulated resource exhaustion testing.

Priority: Critical | Status: Pending

---

REQ-015: Drawing and layout tools: shapes, lines, connectors, sticky notes, text boxes, grouping, alignment, …

Related Threats:

• THR-004: Cross-site scripting (XSS) via user-supplied text boxes, sticky notes, embedded …
• THR-013: Broken access control or logic flaws allow users to escalate privileges (e.g., M…

Security Controls:

• [OWASP] V6.1: [OWASP] Verify that all inputs, including drawing primitives, SVG, and layout data, are …
• [NIST] SI-10: [NIST] Input validation and sanitization to prevent malicious data from compromising sy…
• [ISO27001] A.14.2.5: [ISO27001] Address security in application design and development including validation of i…

Verification: Fuzzing of shape inputs, SVG sanitizer tests, and code review for rendering pipeline., Validation test cases and library dependency management audits., Design artefact review and security test coverage reports.

Priority: High | Status: Pending

---

REQ-016: Embedding external content (images, documents, videos, links) with validation, sanitization, and con…

Related Threats:

• THR-002: Client-side JavaScript or local cached board deltas are tampered with (local mod…
• THR-004: Cross-site scripting (XSS) via user-supplied text boxes, sticky notes, embedded …
• THR-005: API endpoints vulnerable to injection (SQL/NoSQL/command injection) allow attack…
• THR-007: Misconfigured object storage (public buckets, insecure signed URL expiry) expose…
• THR-008: Compromised third-party integration (e.g., Jira, Google Drive) or leaked integra…
• …and 5 more threats

Security Controls:

• [OWASP] V6.5: [OWASP] Verify that embedded third-party content is sandboxed, validated, and subject to…
• [NIST] SA-12: [NIST] Controls for using third-party services and components including vetting and sec…
• [NIST] SC-7: [NIST] Boundary protection and segregation of third-party content to limit exposure to …

Verification: Third-party risk assessments and contractual evidence of security requirements., CSP and sandbox tests, iframe attribute checks, and pentest attempts to escape sandbox., Network segregation review and content proxy configuration inspection.

Priority: Critical | Status: Pending

---

REQ-017: Interactive widgets (voting, timers) that run client-side safely and adhere to permission checks and…

Related Threats:

• THR-002: Client-side JavaScript or local cached board deltas are tampered with (local mod…
• THR-004: Cross-site scripting (XSS) via user-supplied text boxes, sticky notes, embedded …
• THR-005: API endpoints vulnerable to injection (SQL/NoSQL/command injection) allow attack…
• THR-007: Misconfigured object storage (public buckets, insecure signed URL expiry) expose…
• THR-008: Compromised third-party integration (e.g., Jira, Google Drive) or leaked integra…
• …and 5 more threats

Security Controls:

• [OWASP] V6.5: [OWASP] Verify that embedded third-party content is sandboxed, validated, and subject to…
• [NIST] SA-12: [NIST] Controls for using third-party services and components including vetting and sec…
• [NIST] SC-7: [NIST] Boundary protection and segregation of third-party content to limit exposure to …

Verification: Third-party risk assessments and contractual evidence of security requirements., CSP and sandbox tests, iframe attribute checks, and pentest attempts to escape sandbox., Network segregation review and content proxy configuration inspection.

Priority: Critical | Status: Pending

---

REQ-018: File upload and asset management with support for common formats (PNG, JPG, PDF, DOCX), virus/malwar…

Related Threats:

• THR-007: Misconfigured object storage (public buckets, insecure signed URL expiry) expose…
• THR-010: Malicious media (audio/video) or crafted files cause remote code execution or me…
• THR-012: Uploaded files contain sensitive data (PII, secrets) that are stored without enc…
• THR-013: Broken access control or logic flaws allow users to escalate privileges (e.g., M…
• THR-014: Predictable or sequential identifiers for boards/assets allow attackers to enume…
• …and 3 more threats

Security Controls:

• [OWASP] V6.6: [OWASP] Verify secure file upload handling: validate content-types, perform virus/malwar…
• [NIST] SI-3: [NIST] Malicious code protection: Employ anti-malware tools for files and attachments, …
• [NIST] SC-28: [NIST] Protection of information at rest: encryption and access control for stored file…

Verification: Storage encryption configuration review and ACL policy tests., Malware detection logs and testing with known-malicious samples in safe environment., Upload fuzzing, malware scan logs review, and access control checks for stored assets.

Priority: Critical | Status: Pending

---

REQ-019: Export boards as raster images or PDFs with permissions enforcement; exports should be logged and op…

Related Threats:

• THR-001: An attacker forges or replays authentication tokens (JWT/OAuth tokens) or exploi…
• THR-005: API endpoints vulnerable to injection (SQL/NoSQL/command injection) allow attack…
• THR-007: Misconfigured object storage (public buckets, insecure signed URL expiry) expose…
• THR-011: An attacker spoofs webhook events or forges callbacks (from Slack/Jira/etc.) to …
• THR-012: Uploaded files contain sensitive data (PII, secrets) that are stored without enc…
• …and 5 more threats

Security Controls:

• [OWASP] V10.2: [OWASP] Verify secure export functionality to prevent unintended data leakage. Ensure ex…
• [NIST] MP-6: [NIST] Media sanitization and protection during transfer including control over exporta…
• [NIST] SI-12 (1): [NIST] Prevent unauthorized data exfiltration by controlling export mechanisms and moni…

Verification: Attempt unauthorized exports, review export logs, and confirm watermarking/redaction applies when configured., Monitoring rules tests and simulated bulk-export detection exercises., Transport encryption checks and integrity verification of exported files.

Priority: High | Status: Pending

---

REQ-020: Integrations with productivity tools (Jira, Asana, Trello), cloud storages (Google Drive, Dropbox, O…

Related Threats:

• THR-001: An attacker forges or replays authentication tokens (JWT/OAuth tokens) or exploi…
• THR-007: Misconfigured object storage (public buckets, insecure signed URL expiry) expose…
• THR-008: Compromised third-party integration (e.g., Jira, Google Drive) or leaked integra…
• THR-009: An attacker floods the realtime sync channels with bogus operations or presence …
• THR-011: An attacker spoofs webhook events or forges callbacks (from Slack/Jira/etc.) to …
• …and 5 more threats

Security Controls:

• [OWASP] V9.1: [OWASP] Verify secure integration with third-party services: least privilege scopes, sec…
• [NIST] SA-9: [NIST] Ensure security requirements for external system integrations and component acqu…
• [ISO27001] A.15.1.1: [ISO27001] Identify and manage security within supplier relationships, including third-part…

Verification: OAuth scope audits, token storage review, and revocation workflow tests., Supplier assessment records and contractual evidence., Integration inventory and supplier security review evidence.

Priority: Critical | Status: Pending

---

Showing detailed mappings for 20 of 30 requirements.

---

Appendix E: References

• OWASP ASVS 5.0
• NIST Cybersecurity Framework
• ISO/IEC 27001:2022
• OWASP Top 10
• MITRE ATT&CK Framework

---

End of Report - Generated by Security Requirements Analysis System v2.0 Generated: 2025-11-19 20:05:18